A. Daniel WEYGANDT (Chairman, Committee on Commodity Problems): I see that you are trying to make up some of the time we lost this morning, so I shall try to be brief myself in introducing document CL 92/6. I have the honour to present to the members of the Council the Report of the Fifty-sixth Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems which was held from 7 to 13 October of this year. The meeting was attended by representatives of 65 governments. In addition the Holy See and 11 international organizations participated as observers. The Committee elected myself as chairman and Mr. Mazlan bin Jusch of Malaysia and Mr. Humberto Carrion of Nicaragua as Vice-Chairmen. The Committee also elected the Drafting Committee which met under the chairmanship of Mr. Paul Baigent of New Zealand. The excellent work performed by the Drafting Committee helped immensely in the final adoption of the report by the Committee. I would be rertliss if I were not also to note the extremely effective work of the Secretariat itself. Mr. Dutia and his staff were most helpful to me and to the CCP itself. Their excellent documents and preparations enabled the Committee to reach its conclusions in a serious, business-like way. In fact, I believe that a number of delegates who attended the meeting said that the meeting perhaps in some Ways should serve as a model for our business here. The discussions of the session were cordial and retnarkably free of polemics and procedural disputes, particularly bearing in mind some of the very delicate policy matters under discussion. It was a very constructive session and it transacted its business in a smooth and positive manner.
The Committee showed awareness and realization that the agricultural commodity trade situation was in a profound state of crisis affecting all countries, both developed and developing. There was also a broad measure of consensus on the need for action, particularly for agricultural and trade reforms. I might add that, even in those areas where there was no consensus, differing viewpoints were clearly stated in an atmosphere of mutual cooperation and understanding. I dwell on this at some length, Mr. Chairman, because in fact there are few issues of greater importance to us than international agricultural trade, and there aré probably few areas where the differences of opinion are any more sharply pronounced, but it was encouraging to me that the cooperative spirit evidenced at the meeting showed that we can in fact work together towards mutually agreed solutions.
The main substantive agenda items included the review of the world commodity situation and outlook, the activities of the intergovernmental commodity groups, follow-up action to Conference Resolution 2/79 on protectionism in agriculture, economic cooperation among developing countries in trade, international action relating to agricultural commodities and FAO's commodity programme of work for the 1988/89 biennium.
The Committee expressed serious concern as regards the commodity trade situation and outlook and stressed the need for lasting solutions to the crisis facing world agricultural trade. It expressed particular concern that the terms of trade of most agricultural exports had continued to deteriorate sharply in 1986 and 1987 and there appeared to be little prospect for improvement.
In the review of developments in agricultural protectionism by the Committee there was a high degree of consensus. The Committee strongly deplored protectionism in agriculture and regretted that agricultural protectionism and the problems resulting from it had seriously increased in recent years. It agreed upon six recommendations for action. These urged that the goals set out in the ministerial declaration on the Uruguay Round be achieved as soon as possible, particularly in relation to agricultural trade and called on countries, particularly those pursuing protectionist agricultural policies, to comply closely with the standstill commitments in the Punta del Este Declaration and to proceed with agricultural policy reforms as soon as possible. The recommendations also urge the achievement of the fullest liberalization of trade in tropical products, including their processed and semi-processed forms. They also urge that in the Uruguay Round the needs of developing countries are fully taken into account and that the principle of differential and more favourable treatment be applied to negotiations on agriculture.
The Committee was also of the view that certain domestic agricultural policies which had clear developmental, social and environmental aims but which did not distort trade should not be called into question. It has also set out the programme of work for the Committee and its subsidiary inter-governmental groups in the area of trade policy analysis.
On ECDC in agricultural trade, the Committee agreed that FAO should continue to support the efforts of developing countries, particularly in the area of providing information on market opportunities and through further analysis of the scope for this trade in the inter-governmental groups. It also expressed satisfaction with the outcome of the regional workshops on ECDC in trade which were held in this biennium and support for those which are planned for the next biennium.
As regards international action relating to commodities and trade, the Committee commented favourably upon the recent improvement in the general state of international relations, but at the same time expressed concern that the situation facing developing countries remained critical. In particular, the Committee expressed its concern about the severe constraints on developing countries' development efforts which are caused by the heavy burden of external debt, deficient inflows of capital, widespread protectionism and depressed terms of trade.
The Committee fully supported the broad lines of the proposed programme of work in the field of commodities and trade for the 1988-89 biennium. It gave strong support to commodity intelligence activities and placed high priority on analytical reports prepared by the Organization in this area. It also considered that the FAO Inter-governmental Commodity Groups provided valuable fora for producing and consuming countries to exchange information, to identify problems facing the commodities and to consider remedial measures.
The Committee also commended the FAO Secretariat's collaboration with other international organizations concerned, such as UNCTAD, GATT, ITC, OECD and IFAP, and the International Commodity Councils. It supported the priority given to the furtherance of ECDC in the work programme for 1988-89 as well as the provision made to continue technical assistance to interested countries in strengthening and implementing national commodity policies.
Before concluding, I should like to express my appreciation to all the delegates who participated in the deliberations of the Committee. Their constructive approach to the agenda items made my task lighter and even, at times, enjoyable. I should also like to thank in particular my two vice-chairmen for their support and assistance. I trust that the Council will endorse the report of the Fifty-Sixth Session and provide guidance on the future work of the Committee and its subsidiary bodies.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Président du Comité des produits de son exposé clair et précis. Je voudrais maintenant donner la parole aux délégués qui voudraient contribuer à enrichir ce débat.
Y a-t-il des délégués qui souhaitent prendre la parole?
Paul R. BRYDEN (Australia): We endorse the report and the discussion which is reflected in it, in particular those sections on the need to maintain the momentum of reform in the Uruguay Round and to attack the underlying causes, protection export subsidies and domestic support programmes, of the present malaise in agricultural markets.
Australia considers that in respect of agricultural trade, reform is vital to the well-being of our agriculture. While the meeting was useful in highlighting the problems brought about by European policies, it was less forthcoming in its criticism of the others, notably the United States. US agricultural policies, particularly in respect of sugar and grains, have been a major sector contributing to distortions in world trade and production.
For grains, the current situation is that world prices are determined more as a result of competition between subsidies than as a result of supply and demand forces. Subsidized production of grains has led to the situation whereby stocks remain at around twice annual world trade and so there can be little optimism that the market will recover substantially in the short term, regardless of the fact that consumption is expected to be ahead of production in 1987-88. In Australia, wheat growers, for example, have responded to the reduction in world prices by reducing acreage by 36 per cent from 12.1 million hectares in 1984-85 to an estimated 8.9 million hectares in 1987-88.
In the major subsidizing countries, producers are sheltered from the marketplace and so have continued to produce large quantities of grain in excess of reasonable market requirements. Particularly in the FAO context it is important to consider the effect that subsidized exports have had on developing countries. Increases in production and exports in the major agricultural producing countries with agricultural commodities. Ironically, this has reduced the ability of these developing countries to repay the overseas debts which they have incurred with the major agricultural subsidizers. These questions are highlighted in the report.
In the face of low world export prices and the availability of cheap food for imports, the incentive to increase production in developing countries is diminished. In the case of food-deficit countries, the reduced incentive to produce locally has been a contributing factor in the continued reliance on overseas food supplies and little, if any, relief in recent years from the threat of crop failure and famine in these countries.
It is too early to predict what effect the recent fall in world stock markets will have on commodity trade. There is a danger, however, that governments could react to the crisis by the introduction of more inward-looking and protectionist policies. Such a response could exacerbate any slow-down in world trade and increase the severity of the problems already facing the developing countries' exporters.
Finally, we would endorse the Committee's comments on the Committee on Surplus Disposals and its importance as a forum for third countries to comment on food aid transactions. In this regard, we would urge the FAO Secretariat to accept the Committee's recommendation that the Secretariat continue to provide statistics on trade in rice.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nuestro colega y amigo Daniel Weygandt, de los Estados Unidos, hizo una excelente presentación de este tema 4, presentación que corresponde a la forma eficaz como el Sr. Weygandt presidió el Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos.
Tal como lo dijo el Presidente del Comité, fue una reunión tranquila, agradable, pero al mismo tiempo productiva y la delegación de Colombia piensa que posiblemente todos esos buenos resultados se deben en forma sustancial a que el Comité trabaja en el marco de la División de Productos Básicos y Comercio dirigida por el Sr. Dutia, división que es una de las mejores y que más activamente trabaja en esta Organización.
Queremos hacer unos comentarios sobre algunos aspectos concretos de este informe en el orden en que aparecen en el documento.
En primer lugar queremos apoyar lo que acaba de decir nuestro colega de Australia y que aparece en el párrafo 37 sobre la conveniencia de que el Consejo insista en que más Estados Miembros deban vincularse al Subcomité Consultivo de Colocación de Excedentes, y particularmente más Estados Miembros de países en desarrollo.
Apoyaríamos así el esfuerzo que viene haciendo el nuevo Presidente del CSD, que es un distinguido funcionario del fraterno país de Egipto.
Sobre el proteccionismo ya lo dijo usted, Sr. Presidente. El Comité deploró fuertemente el proteccionismo, esto consta en el párrafo 39; pensamos que el Consejo debe de apoyar esta opinión del Comité. Y para justificar esa actitud la delegación de Colombia propone que en nuestro informe se incluyan algunas de las referencias que se hacen en el párrafo 40 sobre las consecuencias y los efectos del proteccionismo, sobre los males generales que el proteccionismo causa a todos.
En el párrafo 45 hay una situación paradójica; se dice que "aunque en la práctica habían aumentado las presiones proteccionistas, al mismo tiempo han proliferado las declaraciones de buenas intenciones, inclusive a muy alto nivel". Creo que convendría que hiciéramos aquí, en el informe del Consejo sobre este tema, referencia a esas importantes declaraciones, como el comunicado de la reunión ministerial de la OCDE en París en mayo pasado, las opiniones del Grupo de los 77 en la reunión que tuvo en La Habana, Cuba, y también el nuevo reglamento de la Comunidad Económica Europea, al igual que las conclusiones a que llegó el Consejo Mundial de la Alimentación en la reunión que tuvo en junio en Pekín, China.
También quisiéramos que constara allí la labor que en favor de la liberalización del comercio viene haciendo el Grupo Cairns, al cual pertenece Colombia, entre estos países en desarrollo y desarrollados.
Para ser consecuentes con lo anterior proponemos igualmente que el Consejo comparta la esperanza que se expresa al final del párrafo 45, esperanza que consiste en que ojalá todas estas declaraciones de buena fe puedan convertirse en hechos mediante la adopción de medidas concretas.
Nos complace mucho apoyar el párrafo 46 en cuanto la participación adecuada, conveniente y eficaz de la FAO en las actividades del GATT. Creemos que, como lo dice este párrafo 46, lo hemos repetido, nuestra Organización tiene experiencia y conocimientos que deben representar valiosos aportes al mejor resultado de esas negociaciones.
Quisiéramos que en el informe del Consejo conste especialmente el deseo de que la FAO asista a los países en desarrollo y desarrollados para que se preparen más conveniente y adecuadamente a participar en las negociaciones de la Ronda Uruguay. Esto se dice al final del párrafo 46 y correspondería a la primera frase del párrafo 75 que dice: "El Comité destacó la función de la FAO en la prestación de asistencia técnica para las consultas y las reuniones sobre productos básicos agrícolas".
Finalmente, creemos que este informe condensa muy bien una serie de conclusiones que aparecen en el párrafo 53, en los romanos (i) a (vi) del párrafo 53 y que apoyamos plenamente esas conclusiones, particularmente en cuanto a la mejor utilización de la Ronda Uruguay, la necesidad de que vayan desapareciendo las políticas agrícolas proteccionistas, la atención prefèrencial que se deben dar a las necesidades de los países en desarrollo y, en general, a la mayor liberalización posible del comercio de productos tropicales.
Dató Ahmad Badri M. BASIR (Malaysia): My delegation is very pleased to see you, Mr Chairman, again chairing this very important session of the Council. We should also like to take this opportunity to congratulate the two Vice-Chairmen elected this morning.
The Malaysian delegation fully endorses the report of this Committee, and would like to congratulate the Chairman on the excellent work that he and his Committee have produced.
The report fully reflects the state of agricultural trade and gives a comprehensive overall view of the problems faced in commodity trade and the state of agriculture. Judging from the report, it is clear that the state of agricultural trade has been stagnant for nearly half a decade, and export prices have fallen much below the level reached at the beginning of the decade. We have also seen that agriculture terms of trade have also fallen against manufactured goods by nearly 30% below the level of 1980. This has led to the voice of dismay expressed by many developing as well as developed countries.
The crisis pointed out by member countries is due to the protectionist policies adopted by many powerful and rich countries, which have distorted trade through the use of huge government expenditures on support subsidies, consequently generating enormous surpluses which are dumped into the international market.
It has also been pointed out that these policies, though consuming such a huge expenditure, have failed to tackle the income problems of small farmers. They have also failed to deal with the root causes of their agriculture problems.
The indignation expressed by member countries against the propagation of these protectionist policies has been very wide and clear, and should be heeded by countries whose policies are mainly responsible for the world's disorderly state of commodity trade.
Most countries have also placed strong hopes on the ongoing negotiations of the Uruguay Round. We hope that the declarations made by the developed countries, such as the OECD Ministerial Communique in 1987 and the Venice Summit will be translated into concrete policy adjustments, which will eventually result in a more disciplined and orderly state in the agricultural market.
We are also sanguine about the possibility of a common fund under UNCTAD's integrated programme for the commodities coming into operation. The agreement reached in UNCTAD-VII to renew dialogue on the programme for commodities and the ongoing multilateral negotiations of the Uruguay Round are the best prospects for bringing order to the agricultural trade. We hope all parties concerned will negotiate sincerely in bringing these negotiations to fruitful conclusions.
The report has also touched on the importance of agricultural trade among developing countries. We feel that the potential for this trade is vast and could be expanded. Developing countries themselves have to make conscious efforts in promoting this kind of trade by dismantling their own trade barriers between developing countries and addressing other problems, such as inadequate infrastructure, to expand such trade.
In conclusion, again we reiterate our endorsement of this report and would respectfully call for policy adjustments among the developed countries to correct the disorder prevailing in the commodity trade.
Raúl LOPEZ LIRA (Mexico): Mi delegación desea reiterar su posición expresada durante la reunión del 56° período de sesiones del Comité de Productos Básicos, cuyas decisiones se encuentran contempladas en los informes respectivos y reflejan el preocupante entorno del comercio de productos básicos que se caracteriza por una simultánea cadena de aplicación de medidas proteccionistas, entre países industrializados entre éstos y los países en desrroilo y aunque en menor grado aun entre éstos últimos y dentro de los países industrializados y en vías de desarrollo.
Como se indicó, lamentamos y nos preocupa la crisis por la que se atraviesa y el hecho de que los ingresos de los países en desarrollo se han visto mermados, principalmente por la baja de los precios
de la gran mayoría de los productos básicos en el mercado internacional, dado que las repercusiones, como lo expresa el informe del Comité, la balanza comercial global de los países de bajos ingresos y con déficit de alimentos a pesar de parecer haber aumentado ligeramente dichos aumentos debían examinarse en el contexto de los flujos totales ya que si estos permanecen a esos bajos niveles se per-judicarán aun más las balanzas comerciales y el crecimiento económico de esos países.
Esto es particularmente grave en virtud de los problemas que confrontamos los países en desarrollo debido al peso del servicio de la deuda y las barreras y precios bajos impuestos a la exportación de nuestros productos básicos.
Insistimos en nuestra preocupación por el hecho de que mientras los precios de exportación de los productos agropecuariqs se encuentran cada día más bajos, los de los productos manufacturados siguen aumentando, por lo que, la relación de intercambio sigue deteriorándose.
Las perspectivas a corto plazo del comercio de productos básicos prevén una expansión sólo limitada de la economía y el comercio mundiales, no observándose previsiones optimistas para el futuro próximo del crecimiento del comercio agropecuario, porque seguramente persistirán los factores fundamentales como, por ejemplo, una oferta abundante de la mayor parte de los productos básicos y un crecimiento lento de la demanda de importación.
Esto nos lleva a recalcar la necesidad de tomar medidas urgentes para modificar la situación negativa que obstaculiza el comercio internacional a fin de que se mejore, ya que los ingresos de este comercio representan para muchos de nuestros países la provisión de divisas que determinan la capa-cidad de servicio de la deuda y para resolver los problemas de la estructura social y económica de los mismos.
Por tal motivo, insistimos en encontrar soluciones duraderas a la crisis que enfrenta el comercio agropecuario mundial, incluida la necesidad de introducir reformas fundamentales en las políticas que afectan al comercio.
Con relación a las actividades de los grupos intergubernamentales sobre productos, coincidimos con los resultados indicados en los informes de cada uno de ellos.
Sin embargo, en lo que respecta al tema h) relativo a semillas oleaginosas, aceites y grasas, reiteramos nuestra posición contra la política proteccionista de la CEE.
Como ya dijimos, es lamentable observar que los países con economías fuertes y una situación estable insistan en poner barreras proteccionistas a los países con economías deficitarias.
Mantenemos la esperanza de que la postura de la Reunión Ministerial de la OCDE del grupo de Cairns y la Ronda Uruguay sirvan de base para la búsqueda de fórmulas tendientes a mejorar la situación comercial actual.
Por último, acogemos con beneplácito los resultados obtenidos durante la VII UNCTAD, particularmente por la constitución del Fondo Común de Productos Básicos y la posibilidad de su próxima utilización.
Asimismo, exhortamos a la FAO para que mantenga su activa participación tanto en este foro como en el del GATT, compartiendo y complementando con su amplia experiencia y banco de datos a estos dos foros de la familia de las Naciones Unidas.
Joachim WINKEL (Germany, Federal Republic of): Mr Chairman, to see you in the chair fills us with confidence for the future good work we shall do here in the Council. I should also like to congratulate Mr Pascarelli and Mr Ansaldo on being nominated as your Vice-Chairmen.
Let me first thank the Committee on Commodity Problems for the work done at its 56th Session. Unfortunately, the document was available to us only here in Rome, so we can only make a few comments following a first perusal. So let me comment on some details on the 56th session of the Committee.
We largely agree with the analysis of the Secretariat. On the whole, the short-term outlook for possible chances of growth of world agricultural trade leaves little cause for optimism. In the field of trade my country will therefore continue our open door policy which we have pursued for a long time. A greater liberalization of trade is in the interests of all concerned. We therefore actively participate in the work of the Uruguay Round of GATT with a view to achieving progress.
Secondly, we welcome the reports on the 17th sessions of the intergovernmental groups on rice, bananas, hard fibres, citrus fruit, jute, kenaf and allied fibres; meat, including hides and skins as well as oilseeds, oils and fats.
Thirdly, we fully endorse the idea of strengthening cooperation between developing countries in the field of commodities (ECDC). This issue has also gained greater attention in other organizations over the last few years and has been gaining momentum.
We welcome the positive attitude adopted by the Committee towards the activities and proposals of the Secretariat as a contribution towards expanding world agricultural trade and increasing the share of developing countries in that trade. We see additional opportunities for developing countries in that field in adopting a greater flexibility in that sector.
Ghulam Mohammed BAHRAM (Afghanistan): In fully supporting the report presented by the Chairman of the Committee on Commodity Problems, the Afghan delegation believes that the food and agriculture situation differs from country to country. On one hand, there is surplus of food in some countries while on the other hand there is shortage of food in the other countries. This gap creates problems and has great impact on food production, import of food, and on agricultural inputs in the developing countries. In order to bridge this gap and achieve self-sufficiency, the Afghan delegate suggests that within the framework of international economic order, a more equitable access to productive resources for sound agricultural development in the developing countries should be provided. Encouraging commodity prices, decreasing foreign debts, and providing international marketing facilities in the underdeveloped and developing countries could be possible elements in achieving economic order.
Roberto ANSALDO (Philippines): Before I proceed to comment on the Committee on Commodity Problems, I should like to thank Bangladesh for their kind nomination of the Philippine delegate as Vice-Chairman of the Council, as well as Pakistan for seconding the nomination.
In view of the difficulties this Council had to pass through in terms of the earlier two agenda items, referring specifically to the Chairmanship of the Conference as well as the voting procedures, I think we should definitely thank this body for its smooth approval of the nomination, as well as the honour that this brings to the Philippine delegation and to our country.
Concerning our comments on the Committee on Commodity Problems, the Philippine delegation wishes to endorse the report of the CCP and to call particular attention to the views expressed by the Committee with the exception of the EEC member countries concerning the so-called stabilization measures in the oilseeds, oils and fats sector. We believe the message of the CCP regarding this matter has to be recorded as part of the report of this Council.
In addition, from the Philippines we should like to add our voice to the general clamour for more rational terms of trade, less subsidies and protectionism.
In the final analysis, we, as a body, are here to be able to bring development to the world and to our countries - development in terms of people, their standards of living, their poverty levels, and their incomes. Unless our work here can translate into that protection of the income of our farmers in general, making farming more profitable, we cannot be said to be contributing to that goal.
João Augusto de MEDICIS (Brazil): The Brazilian delegation wishes to reiterate its support for the conclusions of the recently held 56th Session of the Committee on Commodity Problems. Our Government attaches great importance to the work of the CCP and of the intergovernmental groups and deeply regrets that the present financial difficulties of FAO have already led to the cancellation of some of their scheduled sessions.
The slow growth in international trade and the ever growing difficulties of the commodities sector reflect the fundamental economic world malaise resulting from an 'unjust and inadequate economic order. The external debt continues to be the major obstacle to development in most regions. Agricultural protectionism, in spite of recommendations in practically all international and regional fora, continues to strengthen in the industrialized world, depressing international prices, increasing the already high stocks of food, hindering developing countries' access to international trade and dislocating them from traditional markets. We appreciate that these concerns are basically incorporated in the report of the CCP.
We also wish to reiterate our support for the recommendations approved by the CCP. The Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations offer an opportunity for improvement in the present international trade disarray. In this respect may we express our support of the effort being made by the Cairns Group, comprised of both developed and developing countries, that aim at a better trade environment for both the developed and developing world.
We deeply believe that: (a) domestic policy measures which distort trade should be the subject of reform; (b) domestic agricultural policies with clear development and social aims should not be questioned; (c) the elimination of support must be gradual and in accordance with the degree of subsidization given by each country to its agriculture; (d) the principle of differential and more favourable treatment for developing countries must be always applied in the Uruguay Round of Negotiations.
Finally, we confirm our support to the chapter dedicated in the report to ECDC: an issue of great importance as a means of improving international cooperation and of helping the establishment of a new and fairer economic order.
Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): Habiendo participado mi delegación del 56° período de sesiones del Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos, se complace en este foro en hacer constar su apoyo general al documento y a sus conclusiones y recomendaciones. Asimismo, quisiéramos hacer nuestras las reflexiones que han sido formuladas por las distinguidas delegaciones de Australia y de Brasil. Con relación al documento CL 92/6 específicamente, no podemos hacer comentarios acerca de sus párrafos específicos como hubiéramos querido debido a que fue recién entregado a mi delegación esta mañana pese a que fue solicitado ya con anterioridad. De manera que no podemos hacer comentarios más específicos que éstos. Pero queremos dejar constancia de nuestro apoyo en términos generales a lo contenido en el documento.
LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais maintenant faire un peu la synthèse. Je crois pouvoir être votre interprète auprès du Comité des Produits pour dire que le Conseil formule son appui au rapport présenté par le Comité des Produits et félicite ce Comité et tous ses organes pour les efforts louables qu'ils ont déployés.
Je crois qu'il y a un consensus sur l'importance vitale attachée a l'organisation du commerce international des produits agricoles qui donne lieu à de sérieuses préoccupations et nécessite une régulation et des réformes du commerce international, puisque le Comité des Produits a constaté que les termes d'échange ont continué à se détériorer en 1986 et 1987 et que les mesures protectionnistes ont eu des effets pervers sur le développement des économies agricoles, surtout dans les pays en voie de développement, puisque ceci a conduit à diminuer en fin de compte leur capacité de remboursement de la dette et à freiner le développement de leurs propres productions. Nous pouvons dire que notre Conseil émet l'espoir que des mesures concrètes seront prises pour assurer une réforme concertée des politiques agricoles, tel que l'a recommandé, le rapport du Comité des produits.
Je pense également que les intervenants et le Conseil soulignent l'intérêt qu'il v aurait à mainte-nir l'élan donné par l'Uruguay Round en laissant, autant que faire se peut, la place privilégiée aux pays en développement pour leur permettre d'accroître leur part dans le commerce international. Aussi bien les pays en voie de développement pourraient bénéficier des informations très utiles disponibles à la FAO qui, comme nous l'avons dit au dernier Conseil, pourraient donner une masse de renseignements facilitant les travaux de l'Uruguay Round.
Enfin, comme l'ont souligné quelques délégués, les pays en voie de développement sont invités à adhérer et à participer activement aux travaux du Comité d'écoulement des excédents pour leur permettre d'intervenir efficacement dans le commerce des produits agricoles.
Je crois que nous pouvons donc féliciter le Comité des produits et souligner encore une fois l'importance attachée à ce problème, qui est au noeud de tous les développements agricoles de nombreux pays du tiers monde.
Ceci étant, je voudrais, avec votre permission, passer au problème des élections et je vous proposerais de commencer par la liste des candidatures pour le poste encore vacant du Vice-Président de votre Conseil. Je voudrais passer la parole à l'honorable déléguée de l'Algérie qui a une communication à nous faire à cet égard.
Faouzia BOUMAIZA (Algérie): Notre délégation est heureuse de proposer la candidature du Cameroun pour la troisième vice-présidence.
LE PRESIDENT: Est-ce que d'autres délégations voudraient prendre la parole?
V.K. SIBAL (India): We consider it a privilege and a pleasure to second this nomination. We think that the Ambassador Felix Sabal Lecco of Cameroon is the right man for this assignment.
Apolinaire ANDRIATSIAFAJATO (Madagascar): Il est particulièrement agréable à la délégation de Madagascar d'exprimer ses sentiments à l'endroit de la proposition qui a été faite pour l'élection du Cameroun au poste de troisième vice-président. Je n'exagérerai rien de dire que le Cameroun et Madagascar entretiennent de très bonnes relations et ont toujours eu une identité de vues lorsqu'il s'agissait de défendre les intérêts du tiers monde en général et ceux de l'Afrique en particulier.
En tout cas, Monsieur le Président, le représentant du Cameroun serait une aide très précieuse pour vous dans la conduite de ces débats et également pour le bureau du Conseil. En tout cas, Madagascar appuie chaleureusement cette proposition.
Joâo Augusto de MEDICIS (Brésil): J'interviens brièvement pour dire que le Brésil approuve avec enthousiasme la candidature du Cameroun à la troisième vice-présidence. Le Brésil et le Cameroun entretiennent des relations d'amitié depuis des siècles avant leurs indépendances et continuent à entretenir des liens d'amitié et de coopération. C'est pourquoi j'ai le grand plaisir et grand honneur de soutenir cette candidature.
Ian BUIST (United Kingdom): I think I can echo the words of the distinguished delegate from Brazil, since our country too has a very long association with Cameroun, and we are delighted to support the nomination.
LE PRESIDENT: Avec votre appui, je voudrais féliciter chaleureusement l'élection de Monsieur Felix Sabal Lecco, Ambassadeur du Cameroun, au poste de Vice-Président de votre Conseil. Il sera d'un appui très précieux,
(Applause)
(Applaudissements)
(Aplausos)
Je crois qu'à présent le Secrétariat a une communication à nous faire sur le chapitre des lections.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Pour le Comité de rédaction, nous avons reçu les candidatures suivantes: Danemark, Egypte, Etats-Unis d'Amérique, Inde, Liban, Nicaragua, Niger, Suisse, Thaïlande, Turquie, Zambie.
Nous avons été également informés qu'il a été décidé que le Comité élirait son président à sa première séance.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): El gobierno de Colombia se siente siempre muy bien representado por cualquier latinoamericano en cualquier posición; pero la lista de Miembros del Comité de Redacción que se nos acaba de leer nos sorprende, Sr. Presidente. Esta mañana hubo una reunión de los países miembros del Consejo de América Latina y el Caribe, reunión en la cual estuvieron presentes siete de los miembros del Consejo. Se habían acordado otros dos países, otros dos países que no digo sus nombres, para el Comité de Redacción; y ahora, aparece un país completamente distinto. Es una constancia por principio y quisiéramos preguntarle a la Secretaría, quién le informó sobre el candidato o los candidatos de América Latina, al Comité de Redacción, Es solamente un episodio, uno más, entre todos, pero que hace parte de una estrategia más amplia.
Elio Pascarelli (Italie): Je voudrais encore une fois remercier le délégué d'Allemagne et le délégué de Cuba qui ont eu l'amabilité de présenter mon nom comme candidat à la vice-présidence et remercier tout le Conseil de l'élection. Je suis très honoré d'accomplir cette tâche avec toutes mes forces, Lorsque l'occasion vous indiquera la nécessité de mon aide je suis à votre entière disposition.
Je pose maintenant la même question que le délégué de la Colombie concernant le représentant de l'Europe: de quelle source provient-il?
LE PRESIDENT: J'aimerais que le Secrétariat nous dise sl cette liste n'est pas mûre et nous donne l'explication.
LE SECRETAIRE GENERAL: Les quatre noms: Allemagne, Etats-Unis, Suisse et Turquie nous ont été communiqués par le groupe de l'OCDE, et les autres par le Président du groupe des Soixante-dix-sept.
LE PRESIDENT: Y-a-t-il des noms que messieurs les délégués voudraient ajouter à cette liste? Monsieur le délégué de la Colombie avez-vous des noms que vous vouliez ajouter?
Humberto CARRION M.(Nicaragua): Yo propongo que si hay alguna confusion en la mente de algún delegado, tal vez, en relación a esa Región, valdría la pena no tomar una decisión inmediata, de no ampliar la lista de propuestas para formar parte del Comité de Redacción, sino simplemente nos pongamos de acuerdo dentro de nuestro Grupo porque aparentemente han surgido algunas contradicciones.
LE PRESIDENT: Je propose donc que nous remettions à plus tard la liste des différentes candidatures, il semble qu'elle ne soit pas définitive, et il serait souhaitable que des contacts puissent être pris comme à l'accoutumée par MM. les délégués pour donner au Secrétariat la liste qui aura obtenu un consensus. Je souhaite que nous puissions avoir aussi rapidement que possible, en tout cas au plus tard demain matin, la liste définitive, parce que nous n'avons que trois jours, il faudra que nous ayons un Comité de rédaction. Donc nous allons laisser les délégués se contacter et nous verrons plus tard.
Je crois que nous pouvons passer à une autre question puisque celle-ci n'est pas mûre, Nous préférons laisser les délégués discuter entre eux avant d'avoir une liste définitive.
António RODRIGUES PIRES (Observateur du Cap-Vert): En tant qu'observateur et Président du groupe africain, je tiens a dire que, pour l'Afrique, il n'y a pas de doute, c'est clair: le Nigéria et la Zambie.
LE PRESIDENT: En tout cas, nous laissons les délégués se réunir et nous apporter une liste qui aura obtenu le consensus de tout le monde; c'est la règle.
Nous fermons la parenthèse et passons à la suite de nos travaux qui comprennent:
Point 5 Rapport de situation sur l'application du Code international de conduite pour la distribution et l'utilisation des pesticides.
C.H. BONTE-FRIEDHEIM, (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): It is my pleasure to introduce and to update Council document CL 92/2, entitled "Progress Report on the Implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides".
In paragraph I of the Council document you find repeated the operative part of the Conference Resolution which formally adopted the International Code.
It is now two years since the Conference adopted the International Code. In the meantime about 30, 000 copies of the Code have been widely distributed in five languages to member countries. In addition, copies of the Guidelines referred to in the Code have also been distributed. The importance of FAO being able to monitor the implementation of the Code in cooperation with member countries was recognized by the 1985 Conference. For this purpose a questionnaire was distributed by FAO to all member nations in October 1986. The questionnaire was intended to collect baseline data on how member nations control and regulate pesticides. It was designed to be a mirror image of the Code with many searching questions to be answered. Eighty-seven countries out of 158 to which the Code was sent have responded to the questionnaire as of 15 October 1987, a response of 55 percent. Replies are still being received, and follow-up efforts are being made by FAO to receive the remaining questionnaires.
Responses are being entered into a computer program in order that such baseline data may be used to measure progress on the part of member governments in implementing the various articles of the Code, whilst at the same time identifying areas where technical assistance may be required. An evaluation has been made of the 77 replies received up to 30 September. Of these 77 replies, nine came from developed countries. The analysis which follows is based only on developing countries' replies.
It is pleasing to note that 50 responding countries stated that they were following the Code, whilst 62 are saying that they found it extremely useful. Sixteen countries stated that so far they did not have legislative power to regulate the distribution and use of pesticides.
Integrated pest management programmes are promoted in only 28 of the countries. Pesticides are still the main means of pest control throughout the world. Generally, countries felt that the pesticides industry did adequate pre-market questioning, although there was considerable room for improvement in the amount done. Most countries, both developing and developed, felt that there was a clear need to strengthen their ability to deal adequately with cases of pesticide poisoning.
Disposal of pesticides and pesticide containers was listed as being a major problem in 49 countries. As a response to this, FAO plans to establish a data and information bank to give advice on the disposal of pesticides and containers. Most countries responded that highly hazardous pesticides were available, the 62 developing countries saying that these were available through food stores generally, with inadequate segregation between foodstuffs and pesticides. Thirty-six responded that misleading advertising was sometimes a problem in their countries.
The FAO questionnaire, produced as an appendix to the Council document, contained 117 questions and the above are a few answers which have been highlighted. These set the scene against which FAO has a task of encouraging member nations to implement the Code. The Government of Japan has agreed to fund a cooperative project for five years to assist in the implementation of the Code in the Asia and Pacific Region. This project will consist of an initial evaluation phase, preparation of detailed work plans and national training courses or workshops on the implementation of the Code. In-service and job-specific training courses will be held for dealers and distributors of pesticides. Training courses will also be held for plant protection and extension staff in safe and efficient use of pesticides. With the help of WHO, medical and/or hospital staff will also be trained in the diagnosis and treatment of poisoning. All these courses will also be designed for the prevention of pesticide poisoning. Sub-regional workshops on harmonisation of pesticide registration requirements will be held and national pesticide registration and control schemes promoted. Assistance will furthermore be directed towards establishing laboratory facilities, particularly for analysis and quality control of pesticides formulations.
A similar project is being developed for the Africa region. The objectives of this project are to establish effective pesticide legislation and to harmonise pesticide registration and control schemes, train personnel to reduce costs of pesticide application and misuse. Priority will be given to those countries which at present have insufficient or no registration and control schemes. It is expected that the project will be financed by UNDP and that implementation might start in early 1988.
Measuring the success of these two projects and related activities will be undertaken through follow-up questionnaires to the Code of Conduct. These replies will then be computerized to enable comparisons to be made on general progress and to identify requirements for further assistance and support. Industrial companies, members of the International Group of National Associations of Manufacturers of Agrochemical Products, better known as GIFAP have committed themselves to adherence to the Code. GIFAP is concentrating on those sections of the Code which refer to the industry's responsibilities and has issued a number of guidelines, the latest of which is a guideline to implementation of the Code for the agrochemicals industry. The guidelines set out those articles in which industry has a responsibility, and includes checklists of responsibilities for various levels of management. Subsidiary companies are being encouraged to follow the lead of the parent company.
FAO very much appreciates the work of non-governmental organizations such as the Environmental Liaison Centre, ELC, and the International Organization of Consumer Unions, IOCU, notably in monitoring the implementation of the Code, and collecting and publishing data from a number of developing countries. Much of the information reported highlights cases of non-observance of the Code, particularly in advertising, packaging, labelling and storage, and often records the inadequacy of national legislative controls.
FAO is preparing for a meeting with interested and involved NGOs to identify how they can cooperate with the organization in the effective monitoring of the Code. While mechanisms will be established for reporting serious breaches of the Code, it is not clear how such breaches can be dealt with. The Organization plans to inform the governments concerned, but it is of the opinion that in addition to government control measures, responsible attitudes are the best first-step approach.
FAO is already taking into account the recommendations of the Ccde with respect to the purchasing of pesticides for field activity. In the near future we shall formally introduce the relevant element of the Code into our tendering procedures, in particular the provision of information on banned and severely restricted products.
The Conference of 1985 recognized that the Code is a dynamic document. More experience of member countries in its adoption and wide use is required before revisions ban be contemplated. FAO will continue to inform member countries of the information collected and of the experience gained. In future FAO will continue to depend on the cooperation of the pesticide industry, international environmental organizations and other parties, but above all on the cooperation of the member countries themselves.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie M. Bonte-Friedheim de sa communication et j'ouvre le débat. Le délégué des Philippines a demandé la parole.
Horacio CARANDANG (Philippines): First of all, I should like to thank the Secretariat for the report that has been given us regarding the implementation of the Code on pesticides.
Similarly we should like to congratulate the Secretariat for the awareness which it has been able to create among the governments, among the public and among the industries about the correct use and distribution of pesticides. I should also like to congratulate the work of the NGOs which have been particularly active in the dissemination of information regarding the Code of pesticides that was passed in FAO two years ago.
In this connection, I should like to refer to the decision taken two years ago when the Code on pesticides was approved. I should like to refer in particular to paragraphs 301 and 302 of the Report of the Conference of FAO of the past biennium. I quote: "While recognizing the significant improvements introduced in the text, the majority expressed deep concern that the principle of 'Prior Informed Consent' no longer appeared in the present version of the Code. They feared that this could lead to an increased flow of highly toxic compounds, banned or severely restricted in the countries of manufacture, to developing countries which were not equipped to handle safely their supply and use. These members, however, recognized the need not to delay the adoption of the Code and accordingly, urged that the principle of 'Prior Informed Consent' be considered for inclusion in any future first revision of the Code.
"The Conference, in noting the additional proposals for amendments, recognized the dynamic nature of the Code, the need for monitoring its observance and for periodical revisions to effectively meet changed conditions. It therefore recommended that such revisions be made after some experience had been gained in the implementation of the Code. Most members suggested there be a first revision within the next biennium."
These two paragraphs that have been read clearly indicate that the majority support the inclusion of the "prior informed consent" principle in the Code, but, as a matter of compromise, it consented that it not be included at the time on the condition that within the next biennium - which is this biennium - such revision should be made after some experience had been gained and that the first revision should be within the next biennium. Mr. Chairman, we are now in the next biennium. I am therefore surprised that the report we have before us is merely for information. I cannot accept this kind of arbitraryv decision that it should just be for information. If the Council could arrive at a decision, then it will make a decision. That note in the agenda item is, for me, immaterial.
The reasons for the inclusion of prior informed consent that were raised by the various delegations two years ago remain valid today. Pesticides that are banned and restricted in the countries of origin constitute a danger to human beings and to the ecology, and for this reason they have been banned and restricted in the countries of origin. If that is so, they will also be dangerous to human beings and to the ecology in the importing countries, and much more so, because the level of training of the farmers who will be using them in the developing countries is less than that of the training of the farmers in the exporting countries. For example, in the country that hosts this Organization farmers who purchase and use pesticides have to have a licence that allows them to buy and use pesticides. In other words, they are trained to use and handle pesticides. Nevertheless, we still read about ecological disasters happening in this country, about the poisoning of rivers, the poisoning of waters that are used for drinking and supply for human beings. If these kinds of disasters happen in countries where people who use pesticides are trained, what kind of disasters might happen in countries which do not have this kind of training? This reason for inclusion of "prior informed consent" is as valid as it was two years ago.
I should like to refer to a decision that has been taken by the European Parliament with regard to the use of pesticides that are banned or restricted in the countries of origin. In a resolution by the European Parliament it called for the stipulation that the "prior informed consent" procedures should be applied by December 1988 or earlier. The European Parliament consists of people who represent, I would say, the civic consciousness of the European people. They are aware of the dangers of pesticides. They are aware of what damage these banned and restricted pesticides can cause in the beautiful continent that is Europe. In the developing countries where there are higher concentrations of population in the rural areas, I think the danger is much greater because of the higher concentration of population and also because of lack of trained personnel to handle the use of pesticides. I think the least that we could do is: (1) that the matter should be allowed to be discussed in the Conference; (2) that the next sessions of the Council should continue to monitor the implementation of the Code on Pesticides and that when the member countries of the Governing Bodies of FAO decide that the time is indeed ripe for inclusion of the "prior informed consent" principle it should be done at its appropriate time.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le délégué des Philippines et je donne la parole à la déléguée de Madagascar.
Mme Jacqueline RAKOTOARISOA (Madagascar): M. le Président, la délégation malgache se félicite, elle aussi, de vous voir présider cette quatre-vingt-douzième session du Conseil. Nous félicitons, par la même occasion, les trois vice-présidents.
Convaincu de l'importance de plus en plus grande que devra prendre l'utilisation des pesticides dans la lutte contre les ravageurs afin de préserver les cultures et de réduire sensiblement les pertes avant, pendant et après les récoltes, Madagascar a toujours soutenu avec vigueur l'idée de l'élaboration d'un code international sur les pesticides. Il se félicite que la Conférence ait adopté le document ayant recueilli le consensus à sa vingt-troisième session. Dans toutes ses interventions lors de l'examen du texte par les organes directeurs de l'Organisation, la délégation malgache,
comme d'ailleurs la plupart des autres délégations, a relevé la relative faiblesse des dispositions de certains articles, leur inadéquation avec les besoins de nombreux des utilisateurs, mais il a été fort heureusement admis que le code avait un caractère dynamique. Des amendements appropriés peuvent et doivent être opérés à mesure que l'on décèlera les principales imperfections.
Le rapport intérimaire qui fait l'objet du document CL 92/2 nous donne raison dans la mesure où l'on commence à relever les points faibles et à dégager les solutions idoines.
Notre délégation félicite le Secrétariat pour la qualité du document et le pragmatisme avec lequel la question a été appréhendée. Mais eu égard aux résultats obtenus - 70 réponses au 15 juillet 1987 -on pourrait améliorer la méthodologie en aidant notamment les Etats à remplir le questionnaire.
L'exploitation des informations et données recueillies nous permet cependant de relever d'ores et déjà qu'une assistance immédiate et substantielle est requise pour renforcer les structures, les techniques, les moyens matériels et les ressources humaines dans les pays en voie de développement. Il faudra aussi, sans perdre de temps, évaluer les aides nécessaires pour assister les pays en voie de développement dans la mise en place des dispositifs nationaux de contrôle et d'homologation des pesticides, et intensifier l'envoi de missions d'enquête en vue de recenser les laboratoires disponibles et déterminer les besoins nationaux et/ou régionaux dans ce domaine.
En cette période de difficultés financières de l'Organisation, les possibilités d'action pourraient se révéler assez limitées. Aussi, apprécions-nous vivement l'initiative prise par le Japon de financer un projet régional. Nous lançons un appel aux autres donateurs, aux ONG et aux institutions internationales sensibles à ces questions pour qu'ils suivent ce bon exemple.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): La delegación de Colombia piensa que &\ amigo Bonte-Friedheim trabaja muy bien en esta materia. Las declaraciones que acabamos de oir del colega y amigo Carandang, de Filipinas, y la distinguida representante de Madagascar por sí solas confirman la preocupación de esta mañana en el sentido de que este tema fuera sólamente para información.
Queremos agradecer a la Secretaría la presentación de este documento 92/2 porque nos permite cumplir la recomendación de la Resolución 10/85 de la Conferencia mediante la cual se adoptó el Código Internacional y se pidió a los gobiernos que siguieran de cerca su cumplimiento.
Reconocemos la adecuada acción de la Secretaría en favor de la promoción de la aplicación del Código.
Pero lamentamos que los resultados sean concretamente insatisfactorios. Esta primera conclusión impone la necesidad de que se redoblen los esfuerzos en ese sentido, sobre todo en cuanto a la asistencia a los países de menores recursos o con escasas posibilidades que les permita comprender y digerir las disposiciones contenidas en el Código a fin de facilitarles su aplicación, y también es necesario que a esos países se les ofrezcan medios adecuados para que puedan responder a la información solicitada.
Naturalmente, será necesario que los países interesados hagan solicitudes de asistencia.
En el párrafo 47 se dice que la FAO ha adoptado un enfoque global con respecto a las necesidades de dar asistencia. Ojalá se nos dijera qué quiere decir un enfoque global y en qué consiste, pues nos preocupa que fuera de esa globalidad puedan quedar sin asistencia países de algunas regiones.
En efecto, originalmente en el párrafo 3 se destacó, con razón, la iniciativa de Japón para contribuir a un fondo fiduciario destinado a ayudar a los Estados Miembros a aplicar el Código; esa era una expresión global. Ahora, en el párrafo 47 se dice que la FAO ha obtenido en principio el apoyo de Japón para un proyecto regional de asistencia a los países de Asia y el Pacífico. La delegación de Colombia desearía que el Japón confirmara esa posibilidad, por la generosidad y el altruismo que distinguen al Gobierno japonés, y, naturalmente, está muy bien que ese primer esfuerzo del Japón se concentre en la región de Asia y el Pacífico a la cual pertenece ese gran país, pero esperamos igualmente que esa asistencia pueda extenderse a países de otras regiones. Decimos esto porque en el mismo párrafo 47 se afirma que se están proponiendo proyectos análogos para otras regiones, especialmente Africa donde el PNUD ha manifestado interés. ¿Y América Latina y el Caribe? ¿Está haciendo algo la FAO en nuestra región? ¿Se nos podría informar al respecto? Sabemos que en Quito,
la capital de Ecuador, fraterno país latinoamericano, una importante organización no gubernamental la Fundación Natura está coordinando una de esas actividades en el área latinoamericana y del Caribe y entendemos que la Oficina Regional hace algo al respecto. Ojalá se nos confirmara. De todos modos no todo es negativo en este informe, la gestión de la FAO ha comenzado a mejorar los resultados. En el COAG se informó que eran menos de 40 países los que habían contestado al cuestionario, ya actualizado en julio de este ano eran 70, ahora, el amigo Bonte-Friedheim ha dicho que ese número ha aumentado en un 10 por ciento estando ahora en 77. Ese incremento sin duda corresponde a las iniciativas importantes adoptadas por la FAO, algunas de las cuales se describen en la sección de este documento pero creemos en la aplicación del documento a partir del párrafo 5. En el 8 se afirma que el cuestionario no es excesivamente complicado, sin embargo algunos países tienen dificultades para suministrar la información solicitada. Somos humildes políticos y carecemos de conocimiento técnico, pero aun así una ojeada del cuestionario que se ha dirigido a los gobiernos y que aparece en el Apéndice A del documento nos ha hecho pensar que tal vez si el cuestionario no es complicado, si es demasiado extenso, preguntamos muy humildemente ¿podrá simplificarse el cuestionario? ¿reducirlo un poco, limitarlo, posiblemente a ciertas etapas y luego ir profundizando, pues, los datos básicos en relación con los diversos aspectos de que trata el Código? Esta sugestión podría coincidir con lo que se dice en el párrafo 9, al final del primer período de observación se enviará un segundo cuestionario, es decir ¿podría acaso considerarse etapas sucesivas que faciliten a los gobiernos, sobre todo a aquellos menos capacitados, para responder ese cuestionario?
La controversia en medio de la cual se adoptó el Código parece haberse calmado un poco según el párrafo 11 que dice "todos los países, tanto en desarrollo como desarrollados, han comprobado que el Código es útil". Esa afirmación debe ser muy satisfactoria para los gobiernos y para la FAO.
Llegamos al convencimiento de que hemos construido un marco satisfactorio para todos.
El párrafo 12 dice que "casi todos los países en desarrollo necesitan mejorar sus servicios técnicos y materiales para poder supervisar y hacer cumplir eficazmente el Código".
Este es un dato que nos preocupa y por ello la delegación de Colombia pide a la Secretaría la más amplia y precisa información posible acerca de qué se está haciendo en ese campo ¿hay ya proyectos, iniciativas, etc.?
Los párrafos 15, 16 y 21 se refieren a la manera como actúan las industrias de plaguicidas, la reacción del gobierno al comportamiento de esas industrias y las dificultades para controlar la calidad de los plaguicidas puestos en venta a los países. Los datos de esos párrafos podrían indicar un balance ligeramente preocupante cuyas consecuencias podrían atenuarse un poco en la medida en que los países en desarrollo tengan mayor conciencia de las deficiencias actuales y las industrias tendrán que respetar cada vez más la actitud vigilante de los gobiernos.
Los párrafos 32 y 44 hablan de la participación de organizaciones no gubernamentales; pensamos que las ONG tienen un papel importante sobre todo en cuanto a la preservación de la salud y el medio ambiente; con ello nos complació oír al Sr. Bonte-Friedheim cuando habló de la intensification de la cooperación de la FAO con las ONG, al igual que el párrafo 44 que apoyamos sobre los propósitos de la FAO de colaborar en los proyectos que tienen algunas ONG.
Los párrafos 34 y 37 se refieren a la capacitación que apoya no sólo al nivel del campesino sino a la preparación de expertos y dotación de laboratorios, párrafo 47. A ese respecto la delegación de Colombia pregunta en qué consiste el Programa a que se hace referencia en el párrafo 33, a qué países se ha prestado asistencia según el párrafo 34 para establecer planes nacionales de registro y control de plaguicidas; dónde se han celebrado los cursos de capacitación de que habla el párrafo 35; qué países y qué regiones han abarcado la misión a que se refiere el párrafo 36; ¿se han celebrado ya y dónde los seminarios regionales a que se hace referencia en el párrafo 37?
En fin, .Sr. Presidente, la delegación de Colombia desea reconocer a la Secretaría de la FAO y en particular al colega y amigo Bonte-Friedheim y al Dr. Brader el interés que han demostrado en difundir los objetivos del Código y obtener la más amplia aplicación. Los comentarios de esta delegación están dirigidos a hacer ese reconocimiento, pero no en forma pasiva, sino estimulando a la FAO para que prosiga por esta buena dirección e intensifique sus actividades ya que el Gobierno colombiano piensa que la adecuada aplicación de los principios del Código representará notables beneficios para los países en desarrollo.
Dato'Ahmad BADRI M. BASIR (Malaysia): My delegation appreciates the presentation by Mr Bonte-Friedheim of the report given to us in document CL 92/2. It has been two years since the FAO Conference unanimously endorsed the Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. Although this period is very short, the report has given us some very positive indications that the Code has made an impact on improving safety and efficiency in the use of pesticides. It has definitely, through the various initiatives, succeeded in increasing awareness among industries, governments and users of the need to pay particular attention to the proper use of this useful but sometimes hazardous substance.
The report has also underlined the inadequacies of the technical and laboratory facilities in developing countries effectively to monitor and enforce the provisions of the Code. Definitely one of the main focuses of this Organization should be on providing the necessary training to strengthen the infrastructures, including expert services and laboratory facilities in developing countries.
Our country very often is faced with problems of the improper use of pesticides which sometimes has resulted in problems due to pesticide residues in our food production. Definitely, the Code, which is complementary to international legislation, would be useful in increasing public awareness of this problem and in pressuring users to conform to the proper usage of these chemicals.
While on this subject, we wish to state that we still strongly believe that the concept of "prior informed consent" should be introduced into the Code. This "prior informed consent" clause would require exporters to obtain, via their own government, the explicit consent of the governments of the importing countries before the export of banned chemicals could take place. We feel that what is banned and considered hazardous in developed countries is equally, if not more hazardous in developing countries where the level of training and expertise is much lower.
There should not be any double standard in the consideration of safety and health of the poor farmers. One may argue that the "prior informed consent" would give rise to unecessary delays in that governments of importing countries would take time to consider the import of the banned product. We think that such a delay is fully justifiable, considering the adverse effects that such products may have on the illiterate farmers in developing countries. It should also be noted that there is quite a large number of chemicals available on the market where it has been reported that up to 1 000 new chemiclas are being introduced annually with about 60 000 chemicals marketed in the United States alone.
With the severe constraints in expertise in the developing countries it is all the more necessary that governments of importing countries should be informed and made aware of any of the hazardous products intended for import by them.
Finally, we would just like to reiterate our strong support for this Code and congratulate the FAO for actively pursuing this matter. We hope that further reports on it will be much more positive than the one which has just been presented today.
Raúl LOPEZ LIRA (México): Mi delegación desea por su conducto, Sr. Presidente, felicitar a la Secretaría por el informe contenido en el documento CL 90/2 sobre la aplicación del Código internacional de conducta para la distribución y utilización de plaguicidas. Ha contado con sólo escasos tres meses para su elaboración, ha hecho gran esfuerzo para lograr la respuesta de 70 países y la realización del examen de la situación actual, lo cual nos permite una primera evaluación de dicha aplicación.
Asimismo mi delegación desearía exhortar a aquellos países que aún no han contestado el cuestionario elaborado por la Secretaría a que procedan a contestarlo ya que ese entorno dará una visión más objetiva de la utilización, responsabilidad o no de estos agentes químicos.
Nos complace saber que existe un consenso generalizado tanto en países en desarrollo como en los desarrollados de que el Código de Conducta es útil.
Felicitamos a la FAO por los esfuerzos que está desplegando para apoyar a aquellos países que no están todavía en condiciones de aplicar dicho Código por la asistencia que sea necesaria conforme se consigna en los párrafos 33 a 38.
Es imperioso que los gobiernos cuenten con controles sobre productos como estos que pueden ser nocivos para la salud, medio ambiente, tierras y demás seres vivos del planeta.
Cabe hacer un llamado a toda la industria de plaguicidas para que actúen en forma responsable mejorando sus sistemas de información sobre la toxicidad de estos productos y su acumulación. En ese sentido nos complace saber que se ha establecido una colaboración con una entidad para elaborar fitogramas y saber que la propia industria de plaguicidas, a través de esta entidad, se encuentra en proceso de llevar a cabo una evaluación y les exhortamos a que continúen en el camino para una aplicación integral de este instrumento importante que es el Código de Conducta.
Consideramos asimismo que la labor de las ONG puede ser importante en coadyugar a los esfuerzos de la FAO y las otras organizaciones del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, y la propia FIDA ya que sólo el esfuerzo común puede garantizar el uso correcto de estos elementos que pueden contribuir al desarrollo agrícola, pero dando garantías para la salud de los pueblos y la conservación del medio ambiente.
Namukolo MUKUTU (Zambia): At this point in time, as this is my first opportunity to address the Council, permit my delegation to say how happy we are to see you, Mr Chairman, in the Chair. We would also take this opportunity to congratulate the the Vice-Chairmen and all the delegations appointed on the assumption of their responsibilities. I wish to commend the Secretariat for producing this very brilliant paper. We have read it with interest and agree with a number of the comments made with regard to the training of extension officers and also the training of farmers. But we feel that there are two areas which are extremely important. One of them is the need for "prior informed consent" by the recipient countries and the other is the need to develop a clear policy on the disposal of large quantities of pesticides.
The issue of pesticides is extremely important for the developing countries. It is most important because our farmers are basically illiterate and also the extension officers are basically illiterate, so that there is more need to develop proper systems for monitoring the effects of pesticides.
My delegation is very concerned that there is a development in the world for those who produce pesticides to dump them on the receiving countries. Zambia is one such country. We deem it necessary that this Council should recommend to the Conference that this matter should be discussed seriously and some solutions developed.
Referring to environmental issues, there is what is called the Brandtland Commission Report which stresses very much the need to conserve the environment. The report is entitled "Our Common Future". The manner in which we tend to operate these days, encouraging the disposal of large amounts of pesticides in the developing countries is not conducive to the creation of an environment which is sound, to provide sustained agricultural production. In this spirit my delegation feels strongly that we must find solutions which will deal adequately with the issues of the disposal of pesticides, and particularly with the issues of ensuring that the developed countries do not distribute or do not dump commodities onto the developing world. The Third World has little capacity to monitor the effects on the environment. It must be incumbent upon those countries which supply the pesticides to play their role in monitoring the environment.
What is not good in a developed country cannot be good in the Third World. With this in mind, we ask all concerned to ensure that they encourage the companies which produce pesticides to develop
ethics, to develop morals, not so much based on business approaches but based on the need for human health, the need for plant health and the need for the conservation of our own environment.
With these few remarks, my delegation is convinced that this issue should not die here.It should not be an information paper. It must be a paper which must go to Conference for proper instructions to be given by Conference.
Almir F.de SÁ BARBUDA(Brazil): On behalf of my delegation I wish to thank Mr Bonte-Friedheim for the comprehensive presentation of this item, and also the Secretariat for the progress report presented to us. We also wish to reiterate our support to the FAO's initiatives regarding the implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. The replies to the questionnaire sent to member countries confirm the importance of the adoption of the Code and the need to increase FAO's assistance in establishing registration and control schemes and strengthening technical and physical national facilities to monitor the provisions of the Code.
In spite of the short time since the adoption of the Code, we appreciate that this preliminary assessment already lists a number of encouraging steps on the part of international organizations, national governments and the industry.
We believe that such revisions are extremely important for member nations to follow national and international action in the implementation of the Code, and it should be periodically put forward by FAO.
My Delegation disagrees, however, that this review is presented for information only. We believe that the principle of "prior informed consent" should be included in the Code. We defended this position on the occasion of the adoption of the Code, as we believe that it will contribute to safer use of pesticides. Taking into due consideration the involved hazards to human health and the environment, we cannot accept that reasons of excessive bureaucracy or of commercial interests be invoked to further prevent the approval of this principle.
Ghulam Mohammed BAHRAM (Afghanistan): Effective and efficient use of pesticides is needed in all countries. However, due to the shortage of modern facilities and qualified personnel, appropriate measures of pesticide use are a problem in most developing countries. Therefore, the Afghan delegation suggests that further technical and financial support be given to developing countries for the safe and appropriate use of pesticides. Attempts should be made in each developing country in terms of pesticide legislation, the import of and appropriate use of pesticides. Also, if the use of pesticides is banned in the producing country, further attempts are needed to ensure the appropriate and safe use of such pesticides in developing countries in order that they become more aware of the safety of such pesticides.
Therefore, the Afghan delegation suggests that this item be included in the Agenda of the Conference for appropriate decision.
Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): La delegación argentina quiere señalar su aprecio por la presentación del documento 92/2 que estamos considerando, y por la presentación que del mismo hiciera el Sr. Bonte-Friedheim. Quisiéramos también unirnos a lo expresado por las delegaciones de Filipinas, Madagascar y Brasil, en el sentido de que consideramos que esta cuestión merece un debate de los Estados Miembros, y que lamentamos, por ello, que el documento haya sido presentado solamente para información.
Quisiéramos señalar asimismo que en nuestro país, las directivas del Código se están aplicando y se cuenta ya desde hace algunos años con un Servicio especializado que atiende el control de los plaguicidas ofreciéndose repetidamente información a los productores sobre el empleo de éstos en los distintos cultivos, así como los problemas de residuos que derivan de una utilización incorrecta o exagerada.
Con relación al documento 92/2 quisiéramos efectuar muy brevemente algunas observaciones. Tomando como base las indicaciones de las respuestas recibidas en la Encuesta efectuada por el respectivo Servicio de la FAO es que se ha podido presentar este documento 92/2, y quisiéramos señalar que, a nuestro juicio, hay algunas de estas indicaciones que constituyen motivo de preocupación.
Existe una importante proporción de países que no se encontrarían satisfechos con los procedimientos empleados por las empresas productoras y distribuidoras. Hay escasa información disponible, y se utiliza mal y en muchos casos, los países de menor desarrollo relativo no disponen de una legislación ni de un servicio especializado que pueda aplicarla y hacerla cumplir, y carecen también de personal capacitado para atender estos problemas. Se hace necesaria, en consecuencia, más información y mayor capacitación de personal técnico. También es imprescindible mayor responsabilidad y ayuda de las compañías exportadoras así como una permanente cooperación de los organismos internacionales y la asistencia bilateral.
En ese sentido, creemos que mucho puede hacerse utilizando mecanismos del CTPD. Se considera necesaria una mayor responsabilidad de algunas compañías, especialmente en sus prácticas comerciales y en algunos casos en el almacenamiento y eliminación de plaguicidas. Deseamos señalar también que los problemas de información, el uso responsable y el control efectivo de pesticidas, no sólo existe en los países en desarrollo, por cuanto estos inconvenientes se observan también en otros que disponen de la capacidad técnica, organización y recursos para aplicar correctamente las directivas de un Código como el que nos ocupa.
Existen múltiples ejemplos que se conocen a diario, algunos difundidos también por los medios de difusión. Todo esto nos sugiere que aún falta mucho por hacer en favor de un empleo nacional y atento de los pesticidas, y que los problemas que tienen los países en desarrollo, en cierta medida, derivan en buena parte de procedimientos comerciales ajenos a ellos mismos.
Estimamos, en consecuencia, que es pertinente que este Consejo efectúe el monitoreo permanente de esta cuestión y esperamos que en el futuro eso pueda ser posible.
Joachim WINKEL (Germany, Federal Republic of): With your permission, Mr Chairman, I should like first to add to the congratulations I have already delivered to the two Vice-Chairmen my congratulations to the third one just nominated, Ambassador Felix Sabal Lecco of the Cameroon.
Allow me to thank the Secretariat for the preparation of document CL 92/2 and especially Dr Bonte-Friedheim for presenting it to us so clearly.
My country took part actively and constructively in the elaboration of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. We, too, adopted the Code at the 23rd Conference in 1985. In 1986, we submitted the Code forparliamentary deliberations on an amended version of the Plant Protection Act for the Federal Republic of Germany. The legislator accepted our proposal and incorporated the Code into the Plant Protection Act of the Federal Republic of Germany.
We welcome the fact that a worldwide enquiry was undertaken designed to provide inrormacion about the experience gained so far in the implementation of the Code. However, we received the questionnaire as late as August, so that we could not meet the deadline of 15 July 1987 for a reply. We have meanwhile sent our reply to the Secretariat.
We consider the result of the worldwide enquiry to be positive. In our view, the statements in paragraph 11 are of particular importance so that all countries, both developing and developed, find the Code useful. We particularly welcome the statement in paragraph 15 that only 3% felt that industry acts irresponsibly. Nevertheless, the causes for this negative assessment should be thoroughly examined.
A great majority sees the implementation much more positively, as reflected in paragraph 15. We also consider the statements in paragraph 28 encouraging, concerning the notification of statutory provisions on the use of pesticides. The information provided in this respect by the Federal Republic of Germany was clear and straightforward. We notified the national provisions on bans and restrictions on the use of pesticides of our new Plant Protection Act on a worldwide basis, and also to FAO, the world organization sponsored by all of us, which is responsible in that field. Moreover, we offer additional information on these provisions.
My Delegation also welcomes the statements in paragraph 43 dealing with the strengthening of international cooperation in that field. In this respect, we recommend the Secretariat to give its attention to the fact that the work results of other important UN Agencies will be incorporated into the work of our Organization in order to achieve as economical as possible use of the scarce funds available, and to avoid duplication.
The document also refers to some weak points which require improvement. In this respect mention should be made in particular of the use of pesticides. The directions for use do not seem precise enough in some cases. The labelling of packages also requires improvement. The strengthening of training in the uses of pesticides is of particular importance, as we have already heard. This training must be orientated towards the practical use of pesticides.
On the whole, we are of the opinion that FAO has taken the right and promising way by adopting the International Code of Conduct. We feel the results are better than might be expected after such a short implementing period of two years. What matters now is to apply the recommendations in force in a competent way and, where this has not yet been the case, to establish the necessary administrative structures allowing the monitoring of the implementation of the Code.
We consider further inquiries at regular intervals useful to enlarge the available data bases. We recommend that the Committee on Agriculture of our Organization should regularly examine the questions in connection with the implementation of the Code.
It has been proposed that "prior informed consent" should be included in the Code, the so-called PIC principle. In my delegation's view this is no adequate measure, at least for the time being. The International Code of Conduct was adopted only two years ago. The experience gained so far has been good, as shown by the results of the enquiry among member states. For that reason, we should not amend the provisions of the Code now, but urge that the Code should be implemented consequently everywhere in order to gain more and broader experience on the whole matter, especially in the field of authorization, registration and control of pesticides under the provisions of the Code of Conduct.
Mrs Joan WALLACE DAWKINS (United States of America): The United States thanks Chairman Bonte-Friedheim for the report, and is pleased that such progress has been made in such a short period. The use of pesticides around the world may pose significant health and safety environmental threats if they are not properly managed, and global food production is dependent upon effective pest and pesticide management. If pesticides are misused, not only will users suffer health risks, but their economies are threatened by crop failures.
The FAO recognized that there was a need for pesticide regulation on a national level, and that the developing countries needed assistance in developing such capabilities. It was also recognized that it is imperative to avoid any disruption of international trade in pesticides, and the proliferation of varying national regulations could result in technical barriers to trade. Therefore a harmonized approach to national regulation was needed. The Code of Conduct adopted by the FAO Conference in November 1985 was a holistic approach to solving the problems of pesticide use worldwide. One of the chief elements of the Codex's framework provided that when a pesticide which is banned or severely restricted in the originating country is exported, the country of import should be notified in a timely manner.
We certainly applaud the efforts which FAO has made towards implementing this Code of Conduct, and we are pleased that 87 countries have responded. We deplore the problem of safety hazards in the use of pesticides but we do believe that this Code of Conduct is the approach that can help solve the problem. We noted that some countries have felt that the "prior informed consent" is a solution to the problem. We in the United States feel that some countries did not receive the Code until June of 1986, so there has not been sufficient time to see if we can solve the problem with the Code. Rather, we feel that we should strengthen the Code in the direction that FAO has taken, through training and technical assistance of the developing countries.
PIC will not effectively resolve the real difficulties associated with the export of banned or severely restricted chemicals - namely, the lack of a capability to evaluate the notices, or to make and carry out technical and policy determinations about pesticide use in general. Countries need their own legislation and regulatory mechanisms for decision-making, and the United States strongly feels that we should help the countries do this, rather than try to solve the problem another way.
PIC creates a false sense of security for the importing countries, because it provides no protection against products re-exported by third parties, or against exports from the country which has no regulations in place; thus a country which does ban a pesticide would not be able to export, or would at least have to wait for a judgement from the country. The same pesticide can be exported freely by another country which does not have a ban in place.
The United States understands that this report is only for discussion and information, not for decision, but it feels strongly that PIC would violate GATT and might constitute arbitrary unjustifiable discrimination between countries, based on the example which I gave a moment ago. We feel strongly that we should seek another way of solving the problem, thus giving the power to the country which is receiving the export.
Paul R. BRYDEN (Australia): Australia has supported the development of the Code and is encouraged by the results of the preliminary survey and its implementation. For our part, Australia has developed a regulatory scheme and believes that this provides adequate protection for our - importing purposes at the present time. We support the intent of "prior informed consent", to ensure that developing countries are not subjected to malpractice in the distribution and use of pesticides. However, we do wonder whether this objective can best be achieved by using the PIC system
As a general comment, we consider that governments and industry have a shiared responsibility for their practices in relation to developing countries. Adherence to other international codes of practice - for example, the World Health Organization's International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes provides evidence that such codes are an effective way of managing malpractice and protecting possibly vulnerable markets. Experience suggests to us that the key to the effective implementation of the Code lies in its simplicity. In this regard Article 6 of the Code of Conduct anticipates that governments will introduce national registration schemes. Such schemes provide the ability to determine and act upon information on pesticides and safety decisions taken by other countries. Article 9 makes provision for information exchange on the part of both the exporting and the importing countries, and through the international register of potentially toxic cherticals. In our view, introducing PIC to the Code could result in unnecessary encumberances to those countries where there are regulatory schemes in practice, and could be counterproductive in countries where regulatory systems have not yet been developed.
In essence, this issue is much more complicated in practice than it may appear on the surface, and in our view much more thought must be given to it, particulary in terms of practical application and consequences to both industry and agriculture in the importing country. On balance we would suggest that the best and most practical way to handle this issue would be to refer it to an expert technical committee, to examine the issue in detail, for subsequent consideration by the wider membership.
V.K. SIBAL (India): I trust Mr. Chairman that you will allow us to add our congratulations to those expressed by our colleagues to your three Vice-Chairmen who will assist you in your task of steering this Council. We would like to express our appreciation for the quality of the document under discussion, and in the very clear presentation by Dr. Bonte-Friedheim.
The Code is barely two years old and has only been in operation for about a year and a half. We agree that this period is perhaps not long enough to assist, with any degree of accuracy or certainty, the impact which the implementation of this Code could have on improving safety and efficiency of pesticides. One of the features which stands out on perusal of this document is that even though the number of countries which have started to respond to the questionnaire has increased from initial levels, the number is perhaps still inadequate to make us feel satisfied that the monitoring mechanisms have reached a state of efficiency or a state which would satisfy us.
In this context therefore the first priority must be attached to strengthening those monitoring mechanisms so that results are available on a scale on the basis of which certain conclusions can be drawn for further action.
We are pleased to note the initiative taken in training and technical assistance by the FAO, as brought out in this document; and particularly the conclusions in paragraph 47 which point to the kind of technical assistance which is required by the developing countries still in the area of training or the strengthening of national infrastructures, including expert services and laboratory facilities. In this context, we would also like to express appreciation for the support offered by the Government of Japan for the Trust Fund and the regional project to assist countries on this issue specifically in this area, and we hope that similar projects will be available for dealing with other geographical areas.
It is accepted that the Code is a dynamic one: it has to be a dynamic code. It has perhaps three, one might say, parties: the governments, the industry, and the environmentalists, who are also interested; and on the basis of experience, amendments have to be considered - must be considered. But these we feel must be made after sufficient study and adequate indepth analysis.
We think that the points being made in respect of PIC are very valuable, as the PIC is meant to supply the deficiencies which exist in the importing countries of pesticides where the mechanisms available are not sufficient to prevent them from becoming victims of malpractice.
So we feel that this is a very important issue to the priority of which attention needs to be given; and at the first opportunity a full study, amendments in respect of this, and other amendments if they are warranted by our experience in the implementation of this Code which should also receive attention.
With these words I would again like to thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity you have given us.
Mourad BENCHEIKH (Algérie): La delegation algérienne prend la parole pour constater que, depuis que, ce point est à l'ordre du jour, la majorité des intervenants ont été ceux des pays du tiers monde. Cela prouve simplement la préoccupation de ces pays face à une situation qui, loin de s'améliorer, est en train de s'aggraver; et cette seule constatation devrait nous convier à puiser dans l'arsenal juridique à notre disposition pour faire de ce point à l'ordre du jour non pas simplement un point d'information mais un point de réflexion pouvant amener des décisions.
Certains des pays du tiers monde ont connu de très graves catastrophes écologiques et je pense - les faits sont là pour le démontrer - que des tonnes de pesticides sont actuellement déversées sur le tiers monde sans aucun contrôle alors que ces mêmes pesticides font l'objet de législations très sévères dans les pays qui les produisent. C'est là le problème politique qui se pose.
Me référant au document CL 92/2, je voudrais simplement relever certaines contradictions. Au paragraphe 16, on nous dit que 66 pour cent des pays qui ont été consultés se sont déclarés peu ou pas du tout satisfaits des pratiques commerciales suivies dans l'exportation des pesticides qui leur sont destinés. Nous lisons plus loin une conclusion très optimiste, au. paragraphe 45, à savoir que l'on a constaté des preuves très encourageantes qui permettent de conclure que l'industrie et le commerce des pesticides veulent jouer le jeu. Cette contradiction ne pourrait être éclaircie que si les rédacteurs ou le rapporteur du projet nous disaient de façon très claire quelles sont ces preuves.
D'autre part, au paragraphe 38, on nous dit de façon très lapidaire que des mécanismes ont été mis sur pied pour signaler les infractions graves au code. Je crois que tous les délégués ici présents seraient tout à fait heureux de savoir quels sont ces mécanismes et de savoir également si ces mécanismes ont pu dégager des infractions graves.
L'intervention que je viens de faire tend simplement à insister sur le fait que, s'agissant d'un problème qui est très grave, comme encore une fois l'a démontré la série d'interventions de la part des pays du tiers monde, nous ne pouvons pas accepter que ce problème soit traité de façon aussi légère, même en admettant qu'il n'y a que deux ans que le code de conduite a été mis en pratique.
La délégation algérienne souhaiterait avoir des réponses très claires aux questions qu'elle a posées et, en tous les cas, elle souhaiterait que nous puissions puiser dans l'arsenal juridique - et nous savons qu'il est important et très diversifié - de façon à ce que cette question ne fasse pas simplement l'objet d'un examen d'information.
Srta. Marina BRICEÑO ZEHL (Venezuela): Me gustaría, Señor Presidente, comenzar la intervencion leyendo muy rapidamente tres párrafos del Documento que creo que son muy interesantes. Uno lo acaba de mencionar el Delegado de Argel y es el párrafo 16:
"El 30 por ciento de los países ¿en desarrolo se muestran satisfechos con las prácticas comerciales seguidas en la exportacion de plaguicidas a sus países y, resumiendo, el 66 por ciento no lo están."
El párrafo 19: con respecto a la cuestión de la asignación de recursos, por parte de los gobiernos, a la tarea de regular eficazmente la disponibilidad, distribución y utilización de plaguicidas en sus países, el 15 por ciento considera que tales recursos son suficientes, el 38 por ciento que son moderados, el 41 por ciento que son escasos y el 7 por ciento que no los lay. El párrafos 21: "el 36 por ciento no poseen medios, ni tienen acceso a ellos, para verificar y controlar la calidad de los plaguicidas puestos a la venta en sus países. Creo que son tres párrafos muy indicativos, si además los ponemos en relación con el artículo 12.3 del Código que en la segunda frase dice la industria de los plaguicidas debería cooperar plenamente en la observancia del Código y promover los principios y pautas éticas expresados por el mismo, independientemente de si el Gobierno es capaz o no de observarlo o hacerlo observar por la industria.
Los tres párrafos que acabo de leer del Documento CL 92/2 indican claramente que los países en desarrllo receptores de plaguicidas que han sido prohibidos o severamente limitados en los países productores y que son altamente tóxicos, no tienen la capacidad ni recursos suficientes para implementar este Código, o por lo menos no para que los años.que han transcurrido hayan sido suficientes. Son procesos que necesitan tiempo, y tiempo bastante largo.
Sin embargo, para la industria volver a reetiquetar sus productos, a formular mejor sus canales de distribución, no es algo excesivamente difícil, es algo que en dos años se ha podido hacer y para lo que no se necesita acumular demasiada experiencia. Cambiar una etiqueta no creo que presente muchas dificultades.
Hemos dicho que los países en desarrollo no están capacitados todavía. Están haciendo esfuerzos, pero no están capacitados para poner en pie rápidamente el sistema de registro y control de plaguicidas. Se necesita, sobre todo, adquirir conciencia de las reales implicaciones que tiene el uso de estos insumos altamente tóxicos y con numerosos efectos secundarios en la salud humana y en el medio ambiente.
La industria no ha respondido de la manera que era factible esperarse. Reitero que la publicidad es insuficiente, y publicidad y etiquetado distribuido después de la aprobación del Código han contravenido las disposiciones del Código en numerosísimos casos. Quede claro en principio que un producto prohibido en un país, en teoría, no se debería producir, tanto menos para exportarlo a otros. El problema es grave, sobre todo en nuestros países; por eso consideramos necesario en este punto volver a introducir en el Código el principio PIC, que estaba incluido en algunas de sus versiones preliminares y fue sacrificado en la búsqueda de la aprobación del Código por consenso en la Conferencia pasada, como muy bien lo evidenció el Delegado de Filipinas al hacer referencia al Informe de la Conferencia misma.
El Código es dinámico, y así lo son también las disposiciones incluidas en él. Consideramos necesario incluir el principio PIC en este momento; no es la solución para todos los problemas, pero es muy útil.
Un punto que dijo la Delegación de Estados Unidos, y que me llamó la atención, creo que dijo que el principio PIC no tiene ninguna utilidad y podría hasta tener repercusiones negativas, ya que tomando en consideración pesticidas reexportados por terceros o exportados en países donde no han sido registrados, bloquearían, digámoslo así, las exportaciones, llamémoslas regulares, que se refieran a los pesticidas prohibid.os o severamente limitados registrados, y expondrían a estos productores "regulares" a una competencia desleal.
Es admirable que se pueda ignorar totalmente al país receptor y pagante de estos insumos en virtud de consideraciones puramente comerciales por parte de quienes los que buscan es mantener y amparar sus mercados.
Un segundo punto que queremos destacar es que en una visión a largo plazo el Código se debe considerar
una medida ad interim pedagógica, por así decirlo, que ayude a racionalizar el uso de los pla-guicidas en la agricultura, en el entendido de que el objetivo hacia el cual debemos tender es el de un uso mínimo y solo en casos muy excepcionales de estos insumos.
Consideramos, por tanto, que se debe enfatizar en el Código y en nuestros debates la necesidad de fomentar y dar mayor prioridad a todos los sistemas integrados de control de plagas que salvaguarden el medio ambiente, aun permitiendo elevados rendimientos en la producción de alimentos.
A este efecto apoyamos lo dicho por la Delegación de Zambia cuando se refirió al Informe de la Comisión para el Medio Ambiente, en el cual se indica la necesidad de ver el futuro desde un punto de vista de un desarrollo sostenible y compatible con la conservación del medio ambiente y de la calidad de la vida.
Apoyamos de igual manera a la Delegación de Filipinas de que este tema se discuta en la Conferencia, y de que el Consejo monitoree sucesivas evaluaciones del Código en sus próximas reuniones.
Carmelo RAGUSA (Italy): I hope that Italy will answer the final questionnaire before the end of this year or at the very beginning of next year. We will answer because it is very good work. In the meantime, I am going to give some information about the national sanitary legislation on the correct use of pesticides. I hope this information will be useful to someone. The control of use of pesticides in Italy is delegated to the regions, leaving to the Ministry of Health the authorization of the commerce, of formulations, and of their uses in agriculture and the coordination of regions. Many of the regions have over the last years adopted services having local importance for the prevention of hazards. As for information I will tell you something about what the Ministry of Health has done before officially answering the document CL 92/2 of September 1987.
Any physician in Italy is obliged to communicate to his region and to the Ministry of Health any case of intoxication caused by the use of pesticides. This is a law of 1975.
General and particular ideas about operative control of the use of pesticides were published in 1984 and many regions have adopted them or are doing so.
A complete index of authorized pesticides with the involved cultures was published in 1985 for common agricultural and sanitary use in the countryside, and it is brought up to date when a new substance is authorized.
The use of helicopters is limited to only a few active substances and to a few cultures, and every treatment must be authorized by the local agricultural and sanitary authority.
Recently the Italian Ministry of Health has adopted the following: Whoever sells herbicides must communicate to the Region and to the Ministry of Health how much he has sold -- this was adopted last year -- and the first resumé will be published as soon as possible.
Secondly, residues found in food by the local sanitary control in Italy were published in 1980 and 1982 and the next one is in the course of being published.
Finally, the farmers will be obliged to have a farmer pesticide book and to note in it every treatment, with the date, the active ingredients, the dose, the culture and so on, to enable the local agricultural and sanitary authority to do its routine control or inspection.
Sumiji NAKAZAWA (Japan): To begin with I should like to associate myself with many of the previous speakers in congratulating the three Vice-Chairman on their unanimous election.
I listened with special interest to the excellent presentation made by Dr. Bonte-Friedheim. My Government appreciates and welcomes the progress report on the implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides for the promotion of this Code in all FAO member countries.
We also recognize that the questionnaire sent to all member countries is very useful, not only in enabling us to understand the present situation of the distribution and use of pesticides in each Country, but in also giving us the basic and necessary data for further activities in the countries and organizations concerned.
From this point of view, we hope that FAO will periodically carry out such research using questionnaires and submit progress report on the Code on a regular basis.
I should like briefly to touch upon the words "prior informed consent". Although we are not sure of their exact meaning, we presume that the object is basically the same as that of article 9 of the Code and could therefore be covered by the flexible application of the 9th article.
Furthermore, in recognizing that the Code is a general guideline and not legally binding for member countries, it does not seem necessary to add any words such as the above-mentioned to article 9.
Should an importing country wish to know information in advance on pesticides to be imported, it is sufficient, we think, for the importing country to request such information from exporting countries in writing.
In conclusion, we have difficulty in supporting the idea that the words "prior informed consent" should be incorporated in the 9th article.
We also believe that, as not much time has passed since the Code was put into effect, we ought first to observe the progress of its implementation, so as then to enter into more effective discussion on each article.
Finally, Mr Chairman, I would now like to draw your attention to paragraphs 3 and 47 of this document.
As introduced in paragraph 47, the Japanese Government already made the exchange of notes with FAO concerning its contribution to a Trust Fund to provide member governments with support in implementing the Code, last September.
We intend to contribute the amount of 547 000 US dollars for the 1987 fiscal year for a regional project to assist countries in Asia and the Pacific and furthermore we are considering support for another area in the second phase.
In this connection, we welcome the fact that UNDP has expressed an interest in supporting similar projects and expect the international community to show increased interest in such activities in this field from now on.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): At the Conference in 1985 the United Kingdom welcomed the adoption of this Code. The United Kingdom played a significant and positive role, I think we all agree, in the preparation of the Code. We have wide experience in pesticides, working with pesticides in our countries and in other, developing countries. In fact, we have a special unit that deals with this, which I will refer to later. We have played a very positive role, we believe, in the preparation of the Code, and we will continue to do so in any future discussions of the Code.
I should like to thank the Secretariat for the very clear presentation they have given us in document CL 92/2 and also express our thanks for the very informative and clear introduction given by Mr Bonte-Friedheim.
In our view, the most significant information to emerge from CL 92/2 is the absence of adequate technical capacity in the government of many developing countries. If I may quote paragraph 13, "Twenty-five percent of developing countries responding to the questionnaire...do not have approved legislative authority to regulate the distribution and use of pesticides. Most of them are aware of this...and are trying to correct the problem...". Paragraph 14: "Twenty-six percent of developing countries... have no registration and control scheme in operation...". Paragraph 19: On the availability of government resources, 15 percent felt that such resources were adequate, 38 percent that they were modest, 41 percent little and 7 percent none. Again, similar points about guidance on
treatment for poisoning and health problems: the absence of this is made in paragraph 22. In paragraph 26 we see that 52 percent indicated that governments were not yet in a position to strictly enforce parts of the Code. These points were made much more effectively and eloquently by our distinguished colleague from Venezuela.
There is a conclusion from this, Mr Chairman, that there is a clear need for the provision of technical cooperation to help developing countries gain expertise in safe pesticides' use and management. It is against this background that we must consider the operation of the Code to date.
Several delegations already have pointed to the need for technical cooperation to help developing countries. We have heard statements from Colombia, Madagascar and a number of other countries on this. We have also just had a very welcome statement from our distinguished colleagues from Japan drawing attention to the very generous, helpful offer they have made.
In the debate in 1985 when the Code was adopted we referred to the organization we have in Britain which is funded from the Aid Programme which has special responsibility for helping developing countries in the safe use and management of pesticides. This is a unit of the Overseas Development Natural Resources Institute, and for a number of years it has been working with governments, developing countries and industry to make pesticide use safer and more effective. The services of this unit are available to countries on the United Kingdom Bilateral Aid Programme and they are also available on a commercial consultancy basis to other countries and commercial concerns.
Paragraph 35 of CL 92/2 refers to training courses, and I am pleased to say that the United Kingdom has been involved and offered bilaterally training of the type referred to in paragraph 35. As also mentioned in paragraph 39 on the development of pictogram labels to make pesticides safer, again I am very pleased to say that our unit in the UK has been responsible for work on this and has been working with GIFAP to produce the pictograms along with industry.
Similarly, there is reference to types of training in paragraph 43. We have been involved with these other agencies and with FAO.
I am also very pleased to be able to announce at this Council that the United Kingdom Aid Programme is funding a special training course in Britain next July to train officials from developing countries in implementing the Code of Conduct. This course is of a global nature and any country that is in receipt of United Kingdom technical cooperation can apply to us, though I would say that we expect there will be a very large demand and it may be that we shall have to form a queue for places on this. Certainly we see this very much as not simply a regional problem but something that has to be tackled globally.
It is against this background of recognition, both by the delegations which have spoken and certainly by the paper CL 92/2, that we have to consider any changes to the Code. In this respect, I think we would stress that the need to provide adequate safeguards to man and the environment from pesticides' misuse is very important. We believe that this can best be achieved by training regulators and operators on the appropriate choice and safe use of pesticides. I stress very much that, whatever is the message that comes from this Council, one of the strong elements in this should be the need for adequate training and resources. We think this is extremely important, and certainly we feel that the international community should concentrate on this aspect rather than at the moment try to introduce "prior infomed consent" schemes. We could prefer to gain experience with other schemes, - export notification schemes and the UNEP/London Guidelines - to understand how these can be approved before we take a particular view on the evolution of the Code.
The message that we get from CL 92/2 is that it is right that this discussion that we are having now should be a discussion, because essentially what comes forward - and this has been referred to by the distinguished delegate for India - is that obviously there are very large gaps in our information about the monitoring of the Code and the results of the first period of operation.
The second point we would make is the difficulty of handling a highly technical discussion in plenary sessions of the governing bodies. This is a point that was alluded to by my colleague, Mr Bula Hoyos, the delegate from Colombia, when he made the point that he was not a technical expert. Neither are we. We would point out here that the Code took a great deal of careful preparation, and it is not practical to think that it can be simply amended as one would amend, perhaps, a procedural resolution. We certainly feel that, if there is to be an evolution of the Code, it should take place in the same
manner in which the Code was prepared, i.e. through consultation with member states, through discussions in working parties - and here I note the Australian comment - and it should then go to relevant technical committees in FAO before there are any positive proposals that come before Council and Conference.
I would conclude, Mr Chairman, by referring to my opening statement in which I mentioned the very positive role that the UK has played in the preparation of the Code and also in the provision of technical cooperation. I should like to take this opportunity to confirm our very positive attitude towards the Code and again our very positive attitude towards providing assistance for developing countries to enable them to use pesticides safely and effectively.
John K. KYAMBWA (Tanzania): I am pleased to note that this agenda item has now been opened for discussion rather than for information only. My delegation is again adding its voice to the many voices already requesting that this agenda item be fully discussed at the Conference. The Tanzanian delegation endorses the Progress Report on the Implementation of the International Code of Conduct on Distribution and Use of Pesticides prepared by the Secretariat. My country has almost adopted the Code by virtue of the fact that an institute that tests, approves and registers all the pesticides to be utilized in the country prior to importation has long ago been established. My country is fully aware, therefore, of the danger to mankind from the misuse of pesticides if not fully controlled. It is because of this background that we fully support the Code and urge that it should be sent to the Conference to be fully discussed.
Vanyob ISARANKURA (Thailand): My delegation would like to inform this Council that Thailand has a simplified pesticide registration scheme under the Poisonous Articles Act, 1967. The legislation covers all toxic substances, with pesticides as one of these substances. The law extends only to those pesticides classified in the Official Gazette as toxic substances. The registration authority is the Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.
We are fully aware of the shortcomings of its pesticide registration and control scheme, which is already in process of being revised. Thailand considers strangthening, implementation and enforcement of its national pesticide registration and control scheme as a substantial part of the country's commitment towards the provisions of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides and its full implementation.
Implementation and enforcement become meaningful only if, at the same time, the laboratory is strengthened so that it becomes fully operational for all necessary control analysis.
Secondly, although we have had this Code only for two years, we accept the fact that there has been much evidence which proves that there is a need to add the principle of "prior informed consent" to the Code.
However, we accept that due to time constraints we fully agree that this should not be done at the Twenty-fourth Conference next week, we think we should at least agree to have the principle at this time and then we can consider the matter at the Twenty-fifth Conference in 1989, otherwise we will have to wait too long.
Gian Paolo PAPA (CEE): A ce point de l'ordre du jour, je souhaiterais porter à la connaissance du Conseil de la FAO trois informations concernant la mise en oeuvre du "Code international de conduite pour la distribution et l'utilisation des pesticides" par la Communauté Européenne.
1. Conformément à l'article 12.6 de ce Code et en liaison avec son article 1.2, la Commission prépare actuellement un rapport au Directeur général de la FAO pour l'informer des actions prises au niveau de la Communauté au cours de ces derniers mois pour assurer la mise en application du code.
2. Conformément à l'article 9.5 du code, la Commission a informé le Directeur du Régistre international des produits chimiques potentiellement toxiques (IRPTC) de la liste des pesticides dont l'utilisation et la commercialisation est interdite en vertu de la réglementation communautaire.
3. Le Conseil de la Communauté Economique Européenne examine en ce moment une proposition de la Commission concernant les exportations et importations communautaires de certains produits chimiques dangereux, proposition qui répond pleinement à la problématique de l'échange d'informations telle qu'elle est formulée à l'article 9 du Code de conduite.
M.le Président, je tenais à faire cette brève déclaration pour confirmer devant le Conseil de la FAO tout l'intérêt que continue à susciter dans la Communauté le Code international de conduite sur les pesticides adopté par la Conférence de la FAO en novembre 1985, et témoigner des efforts accomplis par la Communauté pour assurer, dans les meilleures conditions, sa mise en oeuvre.
António RODRIGUES PIRES (Observateur du Cap-Vert): Je serai très bref car les délégations qui m'ont précédé, Madagascar, Zambie, Philippines, Inde, Tanzanie, ont déjà dit ce que j'avais à dire. Je tiens à associer ma voix à la leur. Toutefois, la délégation cap-verdienne tient à dire qu'en 1985 nous avons discuté de ces questions de code, nous ne voulons pas y revenir. Nous pensons que la bonne volonté de la FAO et des Etats Membres, parmi lesquels les pays en voie de développement, ne suffit pas. Il faut que nous soyons très clairs.
Les besoins financiers pour aider les pays à se doter des structures qui conviennent pour le contrôle et l'homologation des pesticides et particulièrement l'utilisation des pesticides au niveau des produits alimentaires - je ne veux pas mettre de côté la question des produits industriels - et l'utilisation des pesticides par les petits paysans constituent pour les pays en développement, en tout cas pour mon pays, la grande priorité.
Le délégué des Etats-Unis a souligné la question de formation des cadres. Il va de soi que sans la formation des cadres à tous les niveaux il n'est pas possible d'appliquer ces propositions et d'observer ce code, ce que nous souhaitons avec beaucoup de force.
Au paragraphe 42 il est dit que nous appuyons également la coopération entre les agences. Effectivement nous pensons que le rôle de l'OMS de s'associer à la FAO peut être beaucoup plus utile pour nos pays. Pour terminer, la délégation du Cap-Vert tient à soutenir ce qu'ont dit les délégations qui nous ont précédés, que j'ai citées auparavant, concernant la question fondamentale des structures nationales et permettant également une coopération régionale et sous-régionale.
LE PRESIDENT: Avant de passer la parole aux délégations qui l'ont demandée nous sommes saisis d'une proposition précise de Monsieur le Directeur adjoint de la FAO concernant la suite réservée à ce document. Si quelques délégués veulent prendre la parole je la leur passerai, mais après avoir recueilli l'avis du Conseil sur cette question précise de Monsieur Walton sur la procédure à suivre.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: May I first go back to the question with which the Director-General dealt this morning, that this document, and indeed the agenda item are presented for information. I would like to re-emphasize forcibly that this is by no means binding on the Council, it was simply, if you like, a bureaucratic notation that was entered in the documentation. But it is not only entirely free for the Council to take any decision it wishes, I should like, after a few disconnected remarks, to propose that the Council take a decision.
Now I should like to make my disconnected remarks. First of all, I would like to re-emphasize the fact mentioned many times in the debate and quoted in the document, which was originally in the FAO Conference Resolution, that this is a voluntary Code of Conduct. "Voluntary" means, of course, that it cannot be imposed. The adoption of the Code of Conduct implied a very extensive process of consultation and concensus; negotiations leading up to the adoption of the Code of Conduct went on for several years, up to its final acceptance by the FAO Conference two years ago.
My next disconnected remark is that I should like to state, again very forcibly, in case there is any doubt about it - and I hope there is not - that the Secretariat is fully sensitive to all the points which have been raised, paricularly by developing countries, in the course of this debate,
and especially on the need for improvements in the Code of Conduct. Repeated references have been made to the issues summed up under the famous "PIC" phrase, "prior informed consent". But there are other areas in which the Code of Conduct is open for improvement.
Next, I would like to go back to the actual text of the Conference decision which was quoted originally by the Representative of the Philippines.
The Conference recommended that revisions in the Code of Conduct "be made after some experience had been gained in the implementation of the Code". I would respectfully suggest that what we have acquired so far is little experience. We may think of this as a train which is accelerating, getting under way. The train has been slower getting under way than I believe was envisaged by the delegations who adopted the Code of Conduct and this paragraph in the report just two years ago. Let us not forget that this is an enormous affair which involves governmental interests and commercial interests, inter-governmental organizations and non-governmental organizations; it involves interests throughout the world.
The train may have been slow getting going, but it is accelerating and I am confident - and I think that the progress report which we have submitted to the Council suggests this - that progress is gathering speed. Although it is not yet satisfactory, there are no reasons for thinking that it will not soon be satisfactory.
The next remark I would like to make is that surely changes in the Code of Conduct should be made with something resembling the process of consultation and consensus that went into the elaboration of the underlying text itself. It would be easy for the FAO Conference simply to change the text, but that would not necessarily lead to changes in the practice adopted by governments and commercial interests throughout the world. This surely is what we are striving for.
I should like to suggest a possible decision by the Council. The Council could request that in the light of the additional experience which will have been accumulated by then, the Committee on Agriculture, which will hold its next meeting in just under two year's time in 1989, should carry out a more detailed assessment of progress and problems in the implementation of the Code of Conduct. At that stage specific consideration could be given to the question of revisions in the Code of Conduct and even to precise textual formulation. The report of COAG in 1989 would come to the FAO Council and would then proceed, if the Council so decides, to the FAO Conference in two years' time. The Council could take a decision to launch this process today and I believe that this would permit an orderly and careful consideration of all aspects and all practical and desirable possibilities for improvement.
This decision which I am suggesting would not preclude the Council also referring the matter to the FAO Conference, but with the Conference just a few days away and with no item dealing specifically with this matter on the agenda, I would frankly express a fear of considerable procedural difficulties in handling this in the Conference. That includes questions relating to the briefing of delegations, particularly those which are not also members of the Council, and even, in some extreme cases, perhaps the composition of delegations to the Conference, since it is not known that this item is to be under discussion.
That is all I wanted to say. Mr Bonte-Friedheim will answer a number of other questions which emerged in the course of the extremely stimulating and useful debate which in my view has given a tremendous impetus not only to the implementation of the Code but also to the work on it by all concerned and to this possible process of review and reassessment.
James D. AITKEN (United Kingdom): We were very interested to hear Mr Walton's suggestions and proposal. Through you, Mr Chairman, if I may, I think we would like to ask for some clarification and explanation of the procedures he envisages. We heard Mr Walton mention the method by which the text we have before us was reached and we took part in the process. It was through a series of technical working parties followed by a series of drafts which were circulated to member states. Then, after the text had been dealt with in the technical working parties it was presented to COAG. It would be very helpful if Mr Walton could confirm that this is a process which he envisages happening again or whether he envisages the text going straight to COAG.
I make this point because, certainly on the last COAG, we had a situation in which many of the delegations, for quite understandable reasons, had not been able to include technical experts from the delegations, and they have often been represented by Rome-based people, who have the same problems as we have of not being experts. We therefore hope that the procedure that Mr Walton is proposing will include the possibility of proposals being worked through by technical experts in expert working parties, and the circulation of texts to capitals so they can be considered by the professional experts, because I think we all here have a difficulty, as general administrators, in dealing with such technical matters.
Srta. Marina BRICEÑO ZEHL (Venezuela): Oímos con mucha atención la proposición formulada por el Sr. WALTON, y sin embargo creemos que debates muy extensos, consultaciones muy extensas se han venido llevando a cabo en todos estos últimos años que han incluido el problema del principio PIC, y no vemos la necesidad para remandar todo a dos años para que el COAG lo discuta y después de consultas técnicas sobre todo.
No podemos aceptar esta proposición formulada y apoyada ahora directamente por el Consejo. Preferiríamos que la decisión que el Consejo tome sea la de pasar el tema para la Conferencia y que la Conferencia, si lo considera, decida cual ulterior decisión tomar al respecto.
Sra. Margarita LIZARRAGA SAUCEDO (Mexico): Mi delegacion será muy breve en honor al tiempo que ya es muy tardío. Nosotros apoyamos la posición que acaba de expresar la delegada de Venezuela.
Mourad BENCHÉIKH (Algérie): Constant avec ma proposition d'il y a quelques instants, j'ai sous les yeux ici l'Article II du Règlement général (page 22 de la version française).
"Au cours de l'une quelconque de ses sessions, la Conférence peut, à la majorité des deux tiers des suffrages exprimés, ajouter à l'ordre du jour toute question proposée par un Etat Membre ou par un membre associé agissant dans les limites de son statut. Toutefois, l'examen de cette question est subordonnée à la présentation d'un rapport établi par le Directeur général sur les incidences éventuelles d'ordre technique, administratif et financier de cette proposition, à moins que, pour des raisons d'urgence, la Conférence n'en décide autrement."
Je crois que nous tenons là le moyen juridique d'inscrire cette question très importante à l'ordre du jour de la Conférence. J'ai écouté très attentivement un certain nombre de délégués des pays occidentaux - et notamment le délégué du Royaume-Uni - qui réduisent ce problème à une simple question de formation professionnelle et d'aide aux pays du tiers monde. Et le délégué du Royaume-Uni escamote tout à fait le problème, qui est le problème politique: est-ce que les gouvernements qui produisent, par le biais d'un certain nombre de sociétés privées, les pesticides sont en mesure de faire pression auprès de ces sociétés par tout un arsenal juridique pour éviter que les pesticides ne soient déversés de façon illégale en direction des pays du tiers monde?
Voilà le problème et il me semble que le renvoyer à deux ans, c'est quand même ne pas tenir compte des préoccupations du tiers monde.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le délégué de l'Algérie. Effectivement, le paragraphe 6 de l'Article II prévoit que la Conférence peut, à la majorité des deux tiers, ajouter à l'ordre du jour toute question proposée par un Etat Membre ou par un membre associé.
J'aimerais demander au Directeur général adjoint si nous pouvons user de cette faculté qui nous est donnée par les Textes Fondamentaux pour aborder une question que tout le monde a évoquée au cours de la Conférence.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I hesitate to give an answer, but I would have thought if the Council recommended that the Conference include an item on its Agenda this would go to the General Committee at its first session and a decision would be taken. I do not think you need to fall back on the two-thirds majority, which applies to the proposal of an individual member nation. It is really up to the Council, I think, to reach a recommendation on this matter.
LE PRESIDENT: La décision appartient maintenant au Conseil. Pouvons-nous considérer que le Conseil proposera, dans son rapport à la Conférence générale, d'analyser cette question, comme l'ont demandé de nombreux délégués? S'il n'y a pas d'opposition, nous allons suivre cette formule pour répondre aux voeux d'un grand nombre de délégués.
Maintenant, je souhaiterais que M. Bonte-Friedheim réponde aux questions posées par nombre de délégués et en particulier celui de l'Algérie.
C.H. BONTE-FRIEDHEIM (Assistant Director-General, Agriculture Department): From a technical side, I should like to thank the many delegations for their interest in the work FAO has done, for the many useful comments, and also for the interesting questions which have been posed. We in the Secretariat will certainly take the comments into account in our future work.
I should also like to state at the beginning that FAO is as concerned as most speakers have been with regard to the situation in many developing countries. The lack of laboratories, the lack of legislation, the lack of trained personnel to implement the Code, are serious in many cases.
We should also like to state here - which we believe is closely linked to the use of pesticides - that our programme called Integrated Pest Management" must go hand in hand with the reduction of the use of pesticides.
I can also state that FAO would have liked to do much more in 1987 in assisting member countries, but unfortunately the 1987 liquidity situation in FAO did not allow us to do as much as we had been asked and as much as we wanted to do.
There were some specific questions which I should like to try and answer.
The first one deals with the questionnaire. FAO has tried to develop a rather full questionnaire in order to get the base line data, as we said in our report. We offered, and we still offer, countries assistance in completing the questionnaire because we will need base line data if weare going to see any changes thereafter. We hope that in successive questionnaires we might be able to change some of the questions asked, and maybe ease the problem of answering, but we still consider the questionnaire as a basis for future work.
Questions were raised with regard to the number of countries which have received assistance in establishing national pesticide legislation. Let me give a few examples. That is in paragraph 34 of the text of the document. Suriname, Ethiopia, Morocco, Sri Lanka, Papua New Guinea and Afghanistan are some of them.
A question was asked on where the training courses were held on the safe and efficient use of pesticides. Again, a few examples are: Tanzania, Paraguay, Ghana, Sri Lanka, Jordan, Republic of Yemen, and Viet Nam.
On paragraph 36, the question was: where have the national and regional survey missions of laboratory infrastructures for pesticide analysis been held? Examples are: Nigeria, Ghana, Sierra Leone, Thailand, Pakistan, Cyprus and Gambia.
Finally, how about regional workshops to harmonize pesticide legislation requirements? Two have been held, one in the Asian and Pacific Region covering India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Republic of Korea and Indonesia, and another one for the Sub-region of Central America.
There was a question as to whether we can say on one hand that many countries were not satisfied with the trading practices in export, and on the other hand state in paragraph 45 that GIFAB is helpful in the implementation of the Code, and how does this fit? I believe there is a time difference. I do not think that what GIFAB has done and is doing has gone all the way to the developing countries themselves, so we hope that in these ones there will be a better response, meaning a response more in line with the Code when we do the next questionnaire.
Let me indicate a few things which GIFAB has done. Let me start with what I consider to be the most important. GIFAB has accepted the principle that national associations which do not adopt the Code cannot be members of GIFAB. For us, that is the most important thing that GIFAB has done. In addition, not only has GIFAB promoted the Code, but it has assisted FAO in training courses, and published guidelines for its members, but whenever there is an opportunity for some meetings which GIFAB is attending - for example, next week in Africa for the creation of an Africa Branch of GIFAB - they always talk about the Code. So thus far the evidence that GIFAB as an association is fully behind the implementation of the Code is very strong.
Questions have been asked with regard to technical assistance to member countries. First of all, I should like to repeat our thanks to Japan, not. only because they have agreed to finance a trust fund project for Asia and the Pacific, but much more for the side remark made by the delegate of Japan that they are willing to consider a second region.
Secondly, I should like to state that with regard to Africa last week consultations were held in Washington with the World Bank for a joint implementation of a UNDP financed project for the region of Africa - "joint" meaning the involvement of UNDP on the one hand, UNIDO on the other hand, the World Bank on the third and FAO on the fourth. We believe that some of the follow-up activities necessarily require an early involvement of the World Bank as well.
With regard to Latin America, from the FAO side we have questioned UNDP whether there are funds available for regional projects to cover Latin America as well. Unfortunately, the regional programme for Latin America is full. So far, we have been unable to identify any other donor who would be willing to provide the necessary funds for the project in Latin America, but we are certainly continuing to look for such a donor.
I also feel that we in FAO are a little bit disappointed that more countries have not used the UNDP IPF to ask for national projects to establish laboratories and legislation in this important field.
Finally, I come to what is for me the most difficult question, that is, how do we deal with the problems of breaches in the Code?
I would like to repeat my statement during the opening stages of this agenda item, where I said -and I quote - "While mechanisms will be established for reporting serious breaches of the Code, it is not clear how such breaches can be dealt With." FAO has problems with the question of how to deal with it: we plan, and we inform governments concerned - but that is, at the moment, the only way in which we know how to deal with it.
The mechanisms which we have established, or are establishing, are basically two. One is that in the Resolution itself, it recommends and requests governments to monitor observance of the Code, and to inform FAO. Secondly, as I have stated, FAO is preparing for a meeting with interested and involved NGOs to identify how they can cooperate with the Organization for the effective monitoring of the Code. So we want to do it in two ways: One is directly with governments, and one is involving those NGOs who are involved in this kind of work.
But I repeat: the question of how breaches can be dealt with is a question which is most likely to be outside FAO's role in this particular field.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie infiniment M. Bonte-Friedheim de ses précisions. Pour que les choses soient bien claires, je voudrais redonner la parole à M. Walton afin qu'il nous explique le circuit légal par lequel nous allons passer pour faire discuter cette question à la Conférence générale en 1987.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: Assuming that the Council puts forward the recommendation that this item be taken up by the Conference, this would go to the General Committee of the Conference at its First Session. The General Committee handles not only the management of the agenda of the Conference as such, but also the allocation of individual items to the different Commissions of the Conference. There will of course be three Commissions, and I assume - I am not attempting to prejudge the decisions of the General Committee, but I would think that the General Committee would assign it to Commission I, which deals with major trends and policies in food and agriculture. I may recall that Commission II deals with the activities of FAO itself, and Commission III deals with constitutional and administrative matters. Therefore, I think that the natural home for this item would be in Commission I.
There would have to be some shuffling of the timetable in order to ensure that this item would be discussed within the time available. It would not be possible - well it would be possible, but I do not think it would be very useful - to produce a new document in the time available, so I assume that the document before the Conference would be the document prepared for the Council, with perhaps a cover sheet summarizing the debates in the Council and the decision taken by the Council on this matter.
Ismael DIAZ TUBERO (España): Tengo, Señor Presidente, una duda después de la última intervención que he oído. Es si realmente lleva este tema a la Conferencia nos va a conducir a algo, ya que, realmente, vamos a discutir otra vez el mismo documento y vamos a hacer otros comentarios que, posiblemente, van a ser parecidos e incluso idénticos, por lo menos en cuanto al contenido. No sé si cabe la posibilidad en la Conferencia de tomar alguna decisión o si ni siquiera cabe esa posibilidad, en cuyo caso yo pediría que aclarásemos un poco este tema. No me opongo en absoluto a que pase a la Conferencia si esto sirve para algo; si no, dejémoslo como está y vayamos por los pasos que se nos han marcado previamente.
LE PRESIDENT: J e crois que la question est posée. La tendance générale, c'est qu'il s'agit d'une question tellement importante que l'on souhaiterait qu'elle soit examinée à la prochaine Conférence et qu'il appartiendra à la Conférence de tirer les conséquences qu'elle estimera utiles. Nous ne pouvons pas en préjuger et nous n'avons pas le droit de porter jugement sur l'efficacité du travail de la Conférence.
Je pense que, moyennant les précisions que vient de donner le Directeur général adjoint, nous répondons aux voeux du Conseil en suivant les directives indiquées par le Directeur général adjoint. Cela étant, il me reste à remercier l'Organisation pour son effort d'analyse en ce qui concerne le questionnaire relatif aux conditions de mise en oeuvre de ce code international de conduite pour la distribution et l'utilisation des pesticides. Je crois que nous avons la confirmation que les pays considèrent que ce code est adéquat, mais ce qui est clair, c'est que les pays en voie de développement, en règle générale, ne semblent pas suffisamment outillés pour utiliser d'une façon rationnelle ces pesticides, de sorte que plusieurs suggestions ont été faites au sujet soit de la formation technique dans les pays en développement, soit de l'examen de principes du consentement préalable, soit de procédures d'homologation des pesticides, soit du renforcement de la coopération internationale dans ce domaine, notamment par un programme international de contrôle des pesticides.
En tout état de cause, je pense que le fait d'examiner cette question à la Conférence nous permettra de lui accorder l'importance qui lui revient et qui a été confirmée par le nombre d'interventions sur ce point, qui semble l'un des points majeurs de l'action de la FAO, ces dernières années.
Il reste deux questions à notre ordre du jour. Je propose, si vous en convenez, que nous nous limitions au point 6, ce qui nous permettra de ne pas perdre de temps, et de renvoyer le point 7 à la séance de demain.
Nous allons passer à l'examen du point 6 de l'ordre du jour. M, Reignier, Directeur du Bureau des Affaires interinstitutions, est prié de nous faire une communication préliminaire.
A. REGNIER (Directeur, Bureau des Affaires interinstitutions): C'est pour moi un plaisir d'introduire devant ce Conseil l'ordre du jour intitulé "Faits nouveaux survenus dans le système des Nations Unies et intéressant la FAO". Le document C 87/9 Sup. 1, qui vous est soumis, porte déjà, ainsi que vous pouvez le constater, la cote de la Conférence puisqu'il sera également discuté durant cette dernière conjointement avec le document C 87/9 dont vous avez délibéré au mois de juin dernier.
Ce document a été préparé récemment et est à jour jusqu'à fin septembre de sorte qu'il y a vraiment peu d'événements nouveaux dont je doive vous parler. Je pourrai, dès lors, être très bref dans la présentation.
Ce document passe en revue les principaux développements au sein du système des Nations Unies ayant un intérêt direct pour la FAO, mais ne couvre pas, bien entendu, les sujets qui seront abordés à l'occasion d'autres points de l'ordre du jour comme, par exemple, les questions financières et de personnel.
Permettez-moi, maintenant, de souligner brièvement quelques points essentiels des derniers événements internationaux dans le système des Nations Unies.
Tout d'abord, le document fait référence à la septième session de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le commerce et le développement, tenue à Genève en juillet dernier. Parmi les nombreux points de son Acte Final, permettez-moi de rappeler que la CNUCED a, en particulier, réaffirmé la validité du Programme intégré pour les produits de base. Il est, par ailleurs, réconfortant de noter que les perspectives d'entrée en vigueur du Fonds commun des produits de base se sont nettement améliorées à la suite de nouvelles signatures et ratifications. Comme vous le savez, le Directeur général de la FAO a participé à cette Conférence, et y a souligné que la FAO était prête à coopérer pleinement aux efforts de la CNUCED dans le domaine des produits de base et, notamment, pour la mise en oeuvre éventuelle de projets et de programmes de développement au titre du 2ème Guichet du Fonds Commun.
En ce qui concerne les négociations commerciales multilatérales, dites "Uruguay Round", je souhaite souligner la satisfaction de la FAO à la décision du GATT de l'inviter, à titre d'observateur, aux travaux du Groupe de négociations sur l'agriculture et celui sur les produits tropicaux.
Le Conseil mondial de l'alimentation a tenu sa treizième session ministérielle à Beijing en mai 1987 et adopté une déclaration qui souligne que la pauvreté est la cause fondamentale de la faim, dont l'eradication exigera non seulement des mesures économiques et sociales d'ensemble, mais aussi et surtout des décisions politiques courageuses.
Le Conseil mondial de l'alimentation a passé en revue divers exemples d'activités menées par les organismes d'aide multilatérale en faveur de l'agriculture, en particulier, la FAO, le FIDA, le PAM et le PNUD; il a, entre autres, apprécié les activités du système mondial DAO d'information et d'alerte rapide pour ce qui est de la FAO.
En ce qui concerne le Conseil d'administration du PNUD, dont la trente-quatrième session s'est tenue à New York en mai dernier, je souhaite simplement rappeler le contenu du paragraphe 33 du document, à savoir que plus de I milliard de dollars seront disponibles pour les activités du PNUD en 1987. Les promesses de contributions des donateurs ont atteint cette année près de 800 millions de dollars et on peut raisonnablement espérer que l'objectif des ressources pour le 4ème cycle de programmation (1987-91) sera pleinement atteint.
On peut discerner également une priorité légèrement plus élevée en faveur du secteur agricole et du développement rural. Dans ces conditions, on peut espérer que la proportion des ressources du Programme qui transiteront à travers la FAO sera plus élevée à l'avenir, ainsi que les indications très provisoires le laissent augurer.
Le document C 87/9 Sup. I donne également une brève description des résultats de la Conférence internationale sur l'abus et le trafic des drogues, tenue à Vienne en juin 1987, ainsi que du Conseil d'administration des Nations Unies pour l'environnement.
Une section du document est également consacrée au problème des femmes dans le développement, sujet qui fera l'objet de discussions plus approtondies à la Conterence, en particulier sur la base du document requis par le Conseil et intitulé: "Les femmes dans le développement agricole et rural: orientation des programmes de la FAO: document C 87/LIM 16".
J'attire également votre attention sur la section relative aux relations avec les institutions financières internationales, paragraphes 89 à 105 du document. Vous pourrez y lire un bref aperçu des activités récentes de la Banque mondiale, y compris sa récente restructuration interne, des banques régionales, du FIDA et de la coopération menée entre ces organismes et la FAO, en particulier à l'intermédiaire de notre Centre d'investissement.
Finalement, la dernière partie du document se réfère à un sujet nouveau mais de pointe, la biotechnologie, traité pour la première fois dans ce genre de rapport. Nous y retraçons les travaux en cours dans les organisations du système des Nations Unies, avec cependant des références directes aux programmes de la FAO dans la mesure où cela est nécessaire à la compréhension du sujet. Nous serions heureux de vos commentaires sur cette importante question.
Monsieur le Président, étant donné l'heure tardive et le peu de temps disponible et le fait que la Conférence aura également à connaître de ces sujets, permettez-moi de m'arrêter ici. Je reste, bien entendu, à votre disposition pour tout complément d'information que le Conseil désirerait recevoir.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie de votre exposé clair et précis et le débat est ouvert si les délégués veulent enrichir les débats.
Ian BUIST (United Kingdom): In spite of the hour, the United Kingdom would like to make a few observations on these documents and they will be very few. I shall concentrate on paragraphs 4-37 of the first paper and make one point briefly on paragraph 89 of the same paper.
Firstly, we are very pleased with the content and the tone of paragraphs 4-27 which represent the Council's own contribution in response to ECOSOC s resolution 1986/74. Of course, these paragraphs cannot be strictly separated from paragraphs 28-37, because these later paragraphs deal with the proposals raised in the United Nations by the Group of 18. We note particularly that Recommendation 12 of the Group of 18 deals with the field representation of the specialized agencies and the UNDP. Some aspects of this are touched upon, of course, in the first paragraphs, 4-27, but certainly not all. Field representation issues should aslo be examined in the light of the proposals made by the Joint Inspection Unit last year on the subject. They were circulated to the General Assembly under paper A/41/424. The JIU proposals include two recommendations which are important here. The first is that the governing bodies of each agency should "put a stay on arrangements for the establishment of field representation" until the relevant criteria are met.
Secondly, each governing body should test the cost effectiveness and efficiency of its field representation by six separate and detailed criteria. We believe FAO should accept those recommendations. I suppose there will be an opportunity to discuss that in more detail later on.
Secondly, the wider immplications of the Group of 18 recommendations for the United Nations system endorsed by ECOSOC clearly have implications for changes and improvements which we believe ought also to be made by FAO. My Government, and many others, have circulated proposals for reforms of this kind which will, of course, again be considered by the Conference.
Thirdly, we notice the difficulties which seem at present to arise in using the UNDP country programmes as an operational framework. These are mentioned in paragraph 15 of the first document, C87/9. But these difficulties should not be seen as an excuse for abandoning the common effort to overcome them. We believe that FAO, along with the other specialized agencies, should be doing its utmost to ensure that all the United Nations systems field activities more actively support the very difficult steps for economic and social adjustment and reform which so many developing countries are now taking.
Finally - and on a separate point - we are pleased to note the action taken by FAO to help deal with locust and grasshopper plagues, but we think much more attention should be given to the strategy for prevention rather than to the tactics for cure. Again, we shall come back to this under other agenda items.
Rainer PRESTIEN (Germany, Federal Republic of): My del egation would like to thank the Secretariat for the presentation of document C 87/9 before us. We can largely agree with what is stated in the document. We particularly welcome the fact that the document has dealt with items which have not yet been dealt with before. We consider the appeal important for improved coordination, in particular at a time of financial stringencies (para. 5). Moreover, we appreciate it that FAO fully supports the role of the Resident Coordinators as laid down in Resolutions 32/197 and 34/213 of the General Assembly (para. 8). We welcome the fact that the cooperation for coordination between the Resident Coordinators on the one hand and the FAO Representatives on the other hand proved to be satisfactory. This fact results from an evaluation of reports of 65 FAO Representatives and the annual reports of Resident Coordinators. Contacts between UNDP and FAO representatives have shown that the cooperation relations between Resident Coordinators and FAO representatives are satisfactory.
We believe that this cooperation will be further strengthened until UNDP and FAO representatives will be able to state jointly that the relations are not only satisfactory, but "good". We noted with satisfaction that FAO seeks to locate its country representatives within existing offices of the Resident Coordinators, wherever feasible (para. 20). The attempt to reach a further harmonization is in our opinion a natural and continuous process which must be promoted to the best of our ability (para. 25).
We should not come to the conclusion that the FAO Secretariat finds almost nothing left to do by way of institutional improvement in the coordination of operational activities, in cooperation with UNDP or in an intensified participation in the Country-Programming Process. We would be grateful to the FAO-Secretariat if it could constructively propose areas and means of improvement.
We would as well appreciate constructive proposals as asked for in operational paragraphs 26, 27 and 29 of ECOSOC resolution 1986/74 and relating to participation in coordinated programming of special organizations, enhanced involvement of NGOs and the integration of TCDC into operational activities.
We consider the statements in paras. 28 and following positive. In our opinion it is important that the whole UN system be made more efficient in order to release at a time of financial stringencies additional funds for operational programmes. We therefore welcome the recommendations of the Group of Experts which were considered by the UN General Assembly at its forty-first session (document A/41/49). An annual one-week session of the Directors-General of the major specialized agencies under the chairmanship of the Secretary-General with the commitment to report to their respective governing bodies on a biennial basis is in our view a proposal worth considering. We had suggested something comparable 13 years ago at the World Food Conference in 1974.
We welcome the statements as contained in paras. 31 - 41 on the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on the critical economic situation in Africa. In his government policy statement at the beginning of the 11th legislative period Federal Chancellor Kohl stated on 18 March 1987 the following in this respect: "Africa continues to be an important field of our foreign and development policies. The African states need peace; they need our support to solve their political and economic tasks on their own responsibility. The Federal Government will coninue this policy".
As explained in paras. 38 to 41 of document C 87/9 the UN Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990 finds FAO's particular interest since agriculture lies at its very core. We would, however, like to hear what FAO does, beyond its participation in various coordination and information groups of the system relating to the programme, materially and additionally to comply with the UN Africa Programme.
The activities of the International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking (ICDAIT) find our full support. Unfortunately, the announced supplementary document on this issue was not available to us for the preparation of this Council session.
We also consider the activities in the UN system of special importance in the field of trade and development (UNCTAD VII) (paras. 66-71), in the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations (paras. 72 - 79) and in the field of early notification of a nuclear accident or a convention on assistance in the case of a nuclear accident or radiological emergency (paras. 80 - 83).
The system-wide medium-term plan for women and development (para. 94) has not been endorsed by the ECOSOC and there are doubts whether endorsement can be achieved through the General Assembly. Given the central role of women, especially in subsistence agriculture, we would be interested to hear what treatment the FAO Secretariat considers to give to the plan under the status it has at present.
We also consider the activities particularly meritorious undertaken by the United Nations in the field of environmental protection (paras. 99 - 105). From our point of view the United Nations is an indispensable international policy forum which we will continue to support.
Ronald MACINTOSH (Canada): Our authorities were reasonable pleased with this document and I wish to commend the Secretariat for what we think is an effort, hopefully an honest effort, apparently an honest effort, to respond to Canada's oft-expressed concern for greater accountability on the performance FAO has made on meeting its obligations in respect of coordination in the UN system. We feel that the discussion was considerably more thorough than many recent documents. We felt that the tone was getting close to being analytical. We were particularly pleased with the report on the resident coordinators. Their work is of particular importance to us as a major contributor to voluntary funds within the UN system. We felt that perhaps the discussion of the tensions or lack of tensions between FAO and UNDP could bear some further elaboration, perhaps in future meetings. Perhaps the description of any problems resulting from personal factors rather than institutional factors was a little optimistic, as we believe there are some institutional issues that bear constant monitoring and constant attention.
Finally, we should like to endorse the comments made by the delegation of the United Kingdom on the discussion held on reform of the UN system in New York. I am afraid we found that discussion, while useful, adopted a rather distant spectator's perspective on those important discussions. We shall be discussing this more thoroughly of course in the Conference and I will not belabour the point now, but we believe that what is happening there is very, very relevant to our work here and to the directions that we must take.
A, REGNIER (Directeur, Bureau des Affaires interinstitutions): Je remercie les distingués délégués qui ont pris la parole sur ce point de l'ordre du jour. En premier lieu, leurs commentaires me semblent avoir surtout été centrés sur le document C 87/9 qui avait déjà été soumis au Conseil du mois de juin dernier et j'ai entendu peu de commentaires sur le document Sup.l qui est la partie nouvelle que le Conseil jusqu'à présent n'avait pas encore vue.
Venant aux commentaires sur la partie qui avait déjà été examinée par le Conseil au mois de juin, je voudrais, pour l'information du distingué représentant du Royaume-Uni concernant les questions opérationnelles, dire qu'effectivement les commentaires et points de vue du Conseil de la FAO en juin dernier sur les questions opérationnelles ont été soumis à l'ECOSOC fin juin début juillet de cette année. Ces commentaires malheureusement, étant donné les débats de l'ECOSOC proprement dit, ont peu été pris en considération mais l'Assemblée générale à sa présente session, par les travaux de la seconde commission, est en train de délibérer des questions opérationnelles et les commentaires du Conseil de la FAO sur ce sujet, tels qu'ils sont contenus aux paragraphes 169 à 182 de son rapport, sont supposés être maintenant devant la seconde commission de l'Assemblée générale.
Par consequent, les questions concernant d'une part le rôle du représentant coordonnateur, l'utilisation de la programmation par pays du PNUD comme cadre pour les opérations et les questions de bureaux de terrain seront également discutées à travers ces rapports à l'Assemblée générale, y compris d'ailleurs le document du Corps commun d'inspection sur la représentation dans les pays.
J'ajouterai également que l'ECOSOC a reçu un rapport de la FAO concernant les campagnes anti-acridiennes menées par la FAO en 1986 et les perspectives pour 1987. Ce rapport a été fort bien reçu par l'ECOSOC et d'ailleurs le rôle de coordination de la FAO dans ce secteur a été souligné à nouveau par l'ECOSOC et l'avait été par l'Assemblée générale préalable. Bien entendu nous continuons à informer les différentes agences autant que les Etats Membres des activités que nous menons dans le secteur de la lutte anti-acridienne.
En ce qui concerne la session spéciale de l'Assemblée générale des Nations Unies sur la situation économique critique en Afrique et le rôle de la FAO dans la mise en oeuvre de ce programme, le représentant de l'Allemagne a posé la question de savoir ce que faisait la FAO, mais étant donné l'heure tardive, peut-être souhaitez-vous que je n'aille pas dans le détail, puisque aussi bien au cours de la Conférence, la semaine prochaine, un document spécifique, le document C 87/6, traitera ce point de l'ordre du jour. Le programme des Nations Unies est évidemment un très vaste programme; la FAO a concouru à la préparation de l'Assemblée générale spéciale en y consacrant énormément d'efforts avec le système des Nations Unies et nous pouvons dire, avec satisfaction d'ailleurs, que l'aspect agricole et développement rural a été reconnu comme la plus grande priorité de ce programme d'assistance des Nations Unie à l'Afrique. Les Nations Unies ont mis en place un Comité directeur sous la présidence du Directeur général à la coopération économique internationale et nous participons à ce Comité et à ses différentes réunions. Nous participons également au niveau régional avec la Commission économique pour l'Afrique et l'OUA à la définition des actions que ce Programme doit entreprendre. Par ailleurs, je pense que nous avons soumis notre propre programme de travail à un examen critique, à la lueur des priorités telles qu'elles avaient été définies par l'Assemblée générale spéciale, et nous cherchons à orienter toujours davantage notre programme pour qu'il réponde à ces priorités telles qu'elles ont été définies par l'Assemblée générale. A l'intérieur de la maison, un groupe spécial, présidé par le Directeur général adjoint, est d'ailleur chargé d'assurer la coordination interne de cet effort, dont le but est d'appuyer ce que l'ensemble du système des Nations Unies a décidé de mettre en oeuvre durant cette Assemblée générale spéciale. Il y aura des commentaires beaucoup plus détaillés bien entendu, pour la Conférence, puisqu'un document est en place, et j'avais moi-même l'intention de présenter ce document beaucoup plus en détail à la Conférence directement.
Paul R. BRYDEN (Australia): I intervene very briefly simply to note, in response to Mr. Regnier's comments that the discussion seemed to be about the document submitted to the General Council, that in my case we only received the document last week, which was insufficient time to receive the briefing from the half-a-dozen government ministries and authorities interested in the issue. Accordingly, I did not intervene on the substance of the matter, but will do so at the Conference.
LE PRESIDENT: Effectivement, il y a eu quelques remarques sur les délais trop courts de remise de documents, c'est, je pense, dû à la surcharge de travail. Le secrétariat fera en sorte que les délégués puissent avoir les documents un peu plus tôt. Je voudrais remercier l'Organisation pour l'effort qu'elle fait pour améliorer les relations sur le terrain entre les différentes réalisations. Je me réjouis de voir que de nombreux délégués ont souligné qu'il y a une amélioration sérieuse et très importante de ces relations qui font que l'efficacité du travail du système des Nations Unies sur le terrain est de plus en plus grande. Nous ne pouvons qu'encourager une telle tendance et noter avec beaucoup d'intérêt cette orientation très positive.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL: I shall add a few words, and I promise they will be very few. On the question of what FAO is doing on the Programme of the General Assembly for Africa, an information document was circulated to the Council and is being re-issued for the Conference as a background document. This shows our actual activities, which cover a great variety of sectors. It is impossible just to summarize them in a brief reply from the podium. That information will be fully available.
On "locusts and grasshoppers - prevention or cure", this will come up in the Conference itself which has an item on the agenda. Here again I would say that the situation differs radically between locusts and grasshoppers, but the Conference will have a possibility of going deeply into that.
There is an additional report before the General Assembly prepared under the aegis of the Director-General for International Economic Cooperation based on actual missions to study the practical problems of coordination at country level. This report tends to bear out many of the remarks made in the FAO document which is before the Council. However, it is too early to report on the reaction of the General Assembly to that report.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois, Messieurs les délégués, que nous pouvons lever la séance, puisque demain nous aurons encore une journée chargée. Nous aurons en particulier l'examen du Programme de travail et budget qui est un point important. J'espère que demain matin nous pourrons avoir des propositions concrètes pour des candidatures pour les présidents des Commissions I, II, III de la Conférence.
The meeting rose at 18.30 hours
La séance est levée à 18 h 30
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.30 horas
